Brown v. Doe et al

Filing 136

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: It is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Doc. # 132 , is ACCEPTED. The motion for summary judgment, Doc. # 108 , and motion to dismiss, Doc. # 109 , both filed by Defendants Jane Doe, Bennette, and Moore, is GRANTED. The motion for summary judgment by Defendants Jane Doe, John Doe, Beckett, Capers, and McKie, Doc. # 112 , is also GRANTED. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L Wooten on 03/23/2015. (dsto, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION

Tookie Brown, aka James Brown,
Plaintiff,
vs.
John Doe, Transportation Officer of
Kirkland; Jane Doe, Transportation Officer
of Kirkland; Bernard McKie, Warden of
Kirkland; Dr. Moore, fnu, Physician of
Kirkland; Dr. Bennette, fnu, Physician
of Kirkland; Mr. Capers; Mr. Beckett; and
Mrs. Murphy; each in his or her individual
and personal capacity,
Defendants.
___________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 4:12-cv-00927-TLW

ORDER
On April 3, 2012, the Plaintiff, Tookie Brown, proceeding pro se, filed this action
alleging violation of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. #1. This matter
now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“Report”) filed by
Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, to whom this case was previously assigned. Doc. #132.
In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant: a motion for summary
judgment, Doc. #108, and motion to dismiss, Doc. #109, both filed by Defendants Jane Doe
(nurse of Kirkland), Bennette, and Moore; and a motion for summary judgment, Doc. #112, filed
by Defendants Jane Doe (transportation officer of Kirkland), John Doe (transportation officer of
Kirkland), Beckett, Capers, and McKie. Objections to the Report were due by February 2, 2015.
No objections were filed.
1

This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s Report 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).
This Court has carefully reviewed the Report, the Magistrate Judge’s analysis of the
record, and the law discussed by the Magistrate Judge. For the reasons articulated by the
Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, Doc. #132, is ACCEPTED. The motion for summary judgment, Doc. #108,
and motion to dismiss, Doc. #109, both filed by Defendants Jane Doe, Bennette, and Moore, is
GRANTED. The motion for summary judgment by Defendants Jane Doe, John Doe, Beckett,
Capers, and McKie, Doc. #112, is also GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Terry L. Wooten
Chief United States District Judge
March 23, 2014
Columbia, South Carolina

2