Home River Group v. Lennon
Filing
13
ORDER adopting 6 Report and Recommendation, remanding case to state court. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 10/24/2024. Clerk's Notice: Attorneys are responsible for supplementing the State Record with all documents filed in Federal Court.(cbru, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
HOME RIVER GROUP, as Agent for 510 SFR §
SC Operations I, LLC,
§
Plaintiff,
§
§
vs.
§
§
LISA LENNON,
§
Defendant.
§
Civil Action No. 3:24-5130-MGL
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND REMANDING CASE TO STATE COURT
Defendant Lisa Lennon (Lennon), who is representing herself, removed this eviction action
from the Sumter County Summary Court.
This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of
the United States Magistrate Judge recommending the Court sua sponte remand the action to state
court. 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 Court, however, need not
conduct a de novo review “when a party makes general and conclusory objections that do not direct
the court to a specific error in the [Magistrate Judge’s] proposed findings and recommendations.”
Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on September 17, 2024. Lennon filed her objections
on October 1, 2024. The Court has reviewed the objections but holds them to be without merit. It
will therefore enter judgment accordingly.
Lennon has failed to present any specific objections to the Report. Her objections amount
to general disagreements with the Report’s findings and merely repeat allegations the Magistrate
Judge properly considered and addressed. To the extent Lennon has brought any new arguments
in her objections, they are conclusory and so lacking in merit as to make any discussion of them
unnecessary. Therefore, the Court will overrule her objections.
Nonetheless, in an abundance of caution, the Court has reviewed the Report and the record
de novo. Suffice it to say, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s treatment of this matter in
her Report.
Further, inasmuch as the Magistrate Judge warned Lennon of the consequences of failing
to file specific objections, Report at 5, she has waived appellate review. See Howard v. Sec’y of
Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505, 508–09 (6th Cir. 1991) (holding general objections are
insufficient to preserve appellate review).
After a thorough review of the Report and record in this case under the standard set forth
above, the Court overrules Lennon’s objections, adopts the Report, and incorporates it herein.
Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court this case is REMANDED to the Sumter County
Summary Court.
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 24th day of October 2024, 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.
3
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?