Jermaine Goode v. Kingstree, The Town of, et al
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court has carefully reviewed the record, applicable law, and the Magistrate Judges Report, (ECF No. 156 ), and finding no clear error in the Report, the Court adopts and incorporates it by reference. Accordingly, Plaintiffs "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment," (ECF No. 105 ), is DENIED. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 08/19/2015. (dsto, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
) Civil Action No. 4:13-3158-MGL
The Town of Kingstree, et al.,
Plaintiff Jermaine Goode, (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed the
instant action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States
Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, for pre-trial handling.
On July 22, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, (“the
Report”), (ECF No. 156), recommending that this Court deny Plaintiff’s “Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment.” (ECF No. 105). Objections to the Report were due by August 10, 2015.
Plaintiff did not file any objections to the Report. The matter is now ripe for review by this Court.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to the Court. The recommendation has
no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court.
See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection is
made. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by
the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(b). In the absence of a timely filed Objection, a district court need not conduct a de
novo review, but instead must “only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record
in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310,
315 (4th Cir. 2005).
Applying the above standards to the instant matter, the Court has carefully reviewed the
record, applicable law, and the Magistrate Judge’s Report, (ECF No. 156), and finding no clear error
in the Report, the Court adopts and incorporates it by reference. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s “Motion
for Partial Summary Judgment,” (ECF No. 105), is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Mary G. Lewis
United States District Judge
August 19, 2015
Columbia, South Carolina
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?