Reaves et al v. City of Mullins et al

Filing 107

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court ACCEPTS the Report 101 . Therefore, for the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, this Court grants the Marion Defendants' Motion to Dismiss/Summary Judgment 81 and grants the Mullins Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 88 , thereby dismissing Plaintiffs' complaint with prejudice. Accordingly, all remaining motions are deemed MOOT 76 , 78 , 91 , and 100 . Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 9/14/2010. (prou, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION Reverend Franklin C. Reaves, Ph.D., et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) Marion County, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________ )

Civil Action No.:4:08-cv-1818-TLW-SVH

ORDER
This matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Athe Report@) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges to whom this case had previously been assigned. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that District Court grant the Marion Defendants' Motion to Dismiss/Summary Judgment (Doc. # 81) and grant the Mullins Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 88), thereby dismissing Plaintiffs' complaint in the above-captioned case with prejudice. (Doc. # 101). The plaintiffs filed an Objection to this Report. (Doc. # 105). In conducting this review, the Court applies the following standard: The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to the Court, to which any party may file written objections...The Court is not bound by the recommendation of the magistrate judge but, instead, retains responsibility for the final determination. The Court is required to make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. However, the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which no objections are addressed. While the level of scrutiny entailed by the Court's review of the Report thus depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, the Court is free, after review, to accept, reject, or modify any of the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations.

Wallace v. Housing Auth. of the City of Columbia, 791 F. Supp. 137, 138 (D.S.C. 1992) (citations omitted). In light of the standard set forth in Wallace, the Court has reviewed, de novo, the Report and the objections. After careful review of the Report and objections thereto, the Court ACCEPTS the Report. (Doc. # 101). Therefore, for the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, this Court grants the Marion Defendants' Motion to Dismiss/Summary Judgment (Doc. # 81) and grants the Mullins Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 88), thereby dismissing Plaintiffs' complaint in the above-captioned case with prejudice. Accordingly, all remaining motions are deemed MOOT. (Docs. # 76, 78, 91, and 100).

IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten_____ United States District Judge September 14, 2010 Florence, South Carolina

2