Joe Hand Promotions Inc v. P & B Enterprises of Florence Inc et al
Filing
21
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: It is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report is ACCEPTED (Doc. # 15 ), and Plaintiff's motion for default judgment (Doc. # 9 ) is GRANTED, as outlined in the Rep ort and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Specifically, default judgment is entered against Defendants P & B Enterprises of Florence, Inc. d/b/a Spin a/k/a Spin Entertainment Complex, Jerry Preston Grantham, Jr., Connee G. Grantham, and Britt John Campama, and they are found to be liable to Plaintiff for their willful violation of 47 U.S.C. § 605. As a result of such violation, Plaintiff is awarded judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $22,000.00 in statutory and enhanced damages plus $2,338.88 in attorney's fees and costs, for a total judgment of $24,338.88. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 6/13/2012. (prou, ) Modified on 6/14/2012 to add link to document #15 (prou, ).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
P & B Enterprises of Florence, Inc.
)
d/b/a Spin a/k/a Spin Entertainment
)
Complex, Jerry Preston Grantham, Jr.,
)
Connee G. Grantham, and Britt John
)
Campama,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
Civil Action No.: 4:11-cv-2020-TLW-KDW
ORDER
This matter is now before the undersigned for review of the Report and Recommendation
(“the Report”) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Kaymani D. West, to whom this case had
previously been assigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2), DSC. In her
Report, Magistrate Judge West recommends that the Court grant Plaintiff’s Motion for Default
Judgment (Doc. # 9) and find Defendants P & B Enterprises of Florence, Inc. d/b/a Spin a/k/a Spin
Entertainment Complex, Jerry Preston Grantham, Jr., Connee G. Grantham, and Britt John
Campama, liable to Plaintiff for their willful violation of 47 U.S.C. § 605. (Doc. # 15). The Report
further recommends that a judgment in favor of Plaintiff be entered against Defendants, jointly and
severally, in the amount of $22,000.00 in statutory and enhanced damages plus $2,338.88 in
attorney’s fees and costs, for a total judgment of $24,338.88. (Doc. # 15). No party has filed
objections to the Report.
1
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).
A review of the record indicates that the Report accurately summarizes this case and the
applicable law. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that
the Magistrate Judge’s Report is ACCEPTED (Doc. # 15), and Plaintiff’s motion for default
judgment (Doc. # 9) is GRANTED, as outlined in the Report and Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge. Specifically, default judgment is entered against Defendants P & B Enterprises
of Florence, Inc. d/b/a Spin a/k/a Spin Entertainment Complex, Jerry Preston Grantham, Jr., Connee
G. Grantham, and Britt John Campama, and they are found to be liable to Plaintiff for their willful
violation of 47 U.S.C. § 605. As a result of such violation, Plaintiff is awarded judgment against
Defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $22,000.00 in statutory and enhanced damages
plus $2,338.88 in attorney’s fees and costs, for a total judgment of $24,338.88.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Terry L. Wooten
United States District Judge
June 13, 2012
Florence, South Carolina
2
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?