Cline v. Horry Co Solicitor's Office et al

Filing 18

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Adopts 14 Report and Recommendation. This action is summarily dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. It is further ORDERED that Cline's motion to dismiss 16 and to waive the filing fee is denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D Austin on 5/23/2017. (gpre, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Michael James Cline, #156213,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Horry Co. Solicitor’s Office;
Robert Colher, Appointed from
Spartanburg Due to Conflict of Interest;
Judge Roger Young, Sentencing Judge;
Warden Willie Eagleton, Evans, C.I.,
Defendants.

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

C.A. No. 4:17-623-HMH-JDA
OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court with the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local
Civil Rule 73.02 of the District of South Carolina.1 Michael James Cline (“Cline”), proceeding
pro se, alleges a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In her Report and Recommendation, Magistrate
Judge Austin recommends dismissing this case without prejudice and without issuance of service
of process because it is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). (R&R 5, ECF
No. 14.)
Cline filed a motion to dismiss his complaint against Judge Roger Young and to waive
the filing fee. However, Cline filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the
absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge, this court is

1

The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a
final determination remains with the United States District Court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423
U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those
portions of the Report and Recommendation to which 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 with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718
F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).
After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case,
the court adopts Magistrate Judge Austin’s Report and Recommendation and incorporates it
herein. Further, the court denies Cline’s motion to dismiss Judge Roger Young and to waive the
filing fee.
It is therefore
ORDERED that this action is summarily dismissed without prejudice and without
issuance and service of process. It is further
ORDERED that Cline’s motion to dismiss and to waive the filing fee, docket number 16,
is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.
Senior United States District Judge
Greenville, South Carolina
May 23, 2017
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Plaintiff is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this order within thirty (30)
days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate
Procedure.

2