Brown v. Dillon County et al

Filing 31

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 28 ) is incorporated herein by reference and Defendant's Motion to Enforce Settlement (ECF No. 23 ) is hereby granted and this action is dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable Bruce Howe Hendricks on 12/18/2015. (mcot, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Anthony Ray Brown,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Dillon County; Dillon County Sheriff’s
Office; Major Hulon, in his official
capacity as Sheriff; and Randy Tyler, in
his individual and official capacities,
Defendants.
_______________________________

) Civil Action No. 4:15-711-BHH
)
)
)
)
ORDER AND OPINION
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff Anthony Ray Brown (“Plaintiff”), who is represented by counsel, brought this
action pursuant to Title 42, United States Code, Section 1983. (ECF No. 1.) In accordance
with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B), D.S.C., this matter was referred to
United States Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, for pre-trial handling and a Report
and Recommendation (“Report”).
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ motion for settlement enforcement
which was filed on October 21, 2015. (ECF No. 23.) Plaintiff did not file a response, and
time to do so expired on November 9, 2015. On November 24, 2015, Magistrate Judge
Rogers issued a Report recommending Defendants’ motion to enforce settlement be
granted. (ECF No. 28 at 4.). The Magistrate Judge advised the parties of the procedures
and requirements for filing objections to the Report and Recommendation and the serious
consequences for failure to do so. (ECF No. 28-1.) Neither party filed objections, and the
time for doing so expired on December 11, 2015.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court.
recommendation has no presumptive weight.

The

The responsibility for making a final

determination remains with this court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270, 96 S.Ct. 549,

46 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
Report and Recommendation or may recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with
instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 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).
After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation, the court finds the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to be proper.
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference and
Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement (ECF No. 23) is hereby granted and this action
is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Bruce Howe Hendricks
United States District Judge
December 18, 2015
Greenville, South Carolina
*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified that any right to appeal this Order is governed by
Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.