Brown v. City of Florence Police Department et al

Filing 59

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Court accepts 54 Report and Recommendation. This case is hereby DISMISSED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 12/2/08. (swel, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION Jerrick Andre Brown, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) City of Florence Police Dep't, Gerald ) Cameron, individually and/or in his official ) capacity, and Michael Swaringer, ) individually and/or in his official capacity, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________)

Civil Action No.: 4:07-cv-1613

ORDER
On June 8, 2007, the plaintiff, Jerrick Andre Brown ("plaintiff"), proceeding pro se, filed this action alleging claims for false arrest, false imprisonment, violations of his due process rights, and negligent hiring, training, and supervision of the defendant officers by the City of Florence, South Carolina. (Doc. #1). The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(c), DSC. The defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on May 23, 2008. (Doc. #45). A response to the defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment was due on June 30, 2008. The plaintiff did not file a response to the defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. This matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation ("the Report") filed by the Magistrate Judge to whom this case had previously been assigned. (Doc. #54). On October 19, 2008 the Magistrate Judge issued the Report. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that "this case be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b), Fed. R. Civ. P.," or in the 1

alternative that "Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment . . . be granted." (Doc. #54). The plaintiff did not file objections to the report. Objections were due on October 27, 2008. This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and this case is hereby DISMISSED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (Doc. #54). IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten United States District Judge December 2, 2008 Florence, South Carolina

2