Stack et al v. Brock & Scott, P.L.L.C. et al

Filing 19

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The Court finds no clear error, adopts the Report, ECF No. 15 , and incorporates the Report by reference herein. As a result, this matter is SUMMARILY DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS. Signed by the Honorable Sherri A. Lydon on November 13, 2023. (ahil)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Corinthea Stack; Lynn Stack,

C/A: 3:23-cv-4297-SAL

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

Brock & Scott PLLC; Chad W. Burgess; Lisa
M. Comer; James O. Spence; Jeffrey Barnes;
Sean Adegbola; LPS Default Solutions Inc.,
Defendants.

Plaintiffs Corinthea Stack and Lynn K. Stack, proceeding pro se, bring this civil action.
This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) issued by United
States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local
Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), recommending that this case be summarily dismissed. [ECF No.
15.] Attached to the Report was a notice advising Plaintiffs of the procedures and requirements
for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if they failed to do so. Id. at 5.
Plaintiffs have not filed objections, and the time for doing so has expired.
The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with this
court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270–71 (1976). The court is charged with making a
de novo determination of only those portions of the Report that have been specifically objected to,
and the court may accept, reject, or modify the Report, in whole or in part. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
In the absence of objections, the court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the
Report and must “only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to

1

accept the recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th
Cir. 2005) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
After reviewing the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case in accordance
with the above standard, the court finds no clear error, adopts the Report, ECF No. 15, and
As a result, this matter is SUMMARILY

incorporates the Report by reference herein.

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF
PROCESS.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

November 13, 2023
Columbia, South Carolina

Sherri A. Lydon
United States District Judge

2