The Baltimore Life Insurance Company v. Brown et al

Filing 39

ORDER adopting 34 Report and Recommendation, awarding the death benefit, anddismissing the action. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 9/24/2018. (cbru, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
THE BALTIMORE LIFE INSURANCE
CO.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
CATHERINE BROWN, YVONNE
GREEN, SHIRLEY PARAMORE,
and ANGELYNE M. GREEN-DAVIS
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 4:18-cv-1099-MGL-TER

§
§

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This action arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1335. Defendants Green, Paramore, and Green-Davis
are proceeding pro se; Defendant Brown has been served personally but has not responded or
appeared. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report)
of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting the death benefit at issue here plus the accrued
interest as paid into this Court’s registry be paid to the primary beneficiaries on the policy,
Defendants Green and Paramore, in equal parts; Defendants and their agents, attorneys or assigns
be enjoined from instituting any additional action in any state or United States Court against
Plaintiff, The Baltimore Life Insurance Company (Baltimore Life), relative to the policy at issue;
and Plaintiff be discharged from all further liability by reason of its payment into the registry of
this Court of the due and owing death benefit, and this case be dismissed in its entirety. The Report

was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Local Civil Rule
73.02(B)(2)(e) for the District of South Carolina.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the
Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court
may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or
recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on August 16, 2018, ECF No. 43, but the parties
failed to file any objections. “[I]n 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) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46
(4th Cir. 1985).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard
set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the
judgment of the Court the death benefit at issue plus the accrued interest paid into this Court’s
registry be paid to Defendants Green and Paramore, the primary beneficiaries listed on the policy,
in equal parts. Further, Defendants, their agents, attorneys or assigns are enjoined from instituting
any action in any state or United States Court against Baltimore Life relative to Baltimore Life
policy number A1054280 or to benefits due under the policy. Finally, Baltimore Life is discharged

from all further liability by reason of its payment into the registry of this Court of the due and
owing death benefit, and this case is DISMISSED in its entirety.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 24th day of September 2018 in Columbia, South Carolina.

s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE