Brown v. Holbrook et al
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court adopts the Report (ECF No. 84 ) and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 70 ) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. If discovery in this case has now been completed, Plaintiff may file a new motion for summary judgment, if he so desires, together with whatever evidence he has to support his claims. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 9/8/2017. (mcot, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
VERNON SAMUEL BROWN,
SKIP HOLBROOK and CORPORAL
Civil Action No. 3:16-02898-MGL-BM
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND
DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This action arises under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter is
before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States
Magistrate Judge suggesting Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 70, be denied
without prejudice. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil
Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the
Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de
novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the
Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on July 17, 2017, ECF No. 84, but Plaintiff failed
to file any objections to the Report. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court
need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear
error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.’” Diamond v. Colonial
Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory
committee’s note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766
F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard
set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the
judgment of the Court Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE. If discovery in this case has now been completed, Plaintiff may file a new
motion for summary judgment, if he so desires, together with whatever evidence he has to
support his claims.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 8th day of September 2017 in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from
the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?