Blakely v. Cartledge et al

Filing 24

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation 19 by reference in this Order. This matter is REMANDED (ECF No. 19 ) to the Court of Common Pleas for the County of McCormick, State of South Carolina. The Clerk of this Court is directed to forward the file along with a certified copy of this order to the Clerk of Court for McCormick County. The court determined this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 17 ). Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 08/28/2013. (dsto, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
) Civil Action No.: 5:13-1712-MGL
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs.
)
ORDER AND OPINION
)
Leroy Cartledge, Warden; A/W Parker;
)
P. Morton; N. Barber; Nurse Andrew;
)
Ms. Franklin, and Ms. Young,
)
)
Defendants. )
_________________________________ )

James G. Blakely, #255623,

Plaintiff James G. Blakely (“Plaintiff”), an inmate with the South Carolina Department of
Corrections (“SCDC”), proceeding pro se filed this action against Warden Leroy Cartledge, A/W
Parker, P. Morton, N. Barber, Nurse Andrew, Ms. Franklin, and Ms. Young (“Defendants”) in the
South Carolina Court of Common Pleas in McCormick County. On June 22, 2013, Defendants filed
a Notice of Removal alleging that the Complaint contained federal claims. (ECF No. 1). On July
2, 1013, Plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case back to state court (ECF No. 11) and, on August
5, 2013, Plaintiff moved for dismissal. (ECF No. 17). This matter is now before the Court upon the
Report and Recommendation (“Report”) of United States Magistrate Judge Kaymani D. West to
whom it was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(e), D.S.C.
Upon review, the Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff had expressed an intent to only pursue statelaw claims in his Complaint and as such this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this matter.
Similarly, the court determined this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss
(ECF No. 17). The Magistrate Judge recommends that the case be remanded to the Court of
Common Pleas for McCormick County, South Carolina. (ECF No. 19.) Neither party objected to
the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation.

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 this court.
See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1). The court may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the Magistrate
Judge with instructions. Id. The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those
portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections are made. Neither party
filed objections to the Report and Recommendation.
After a thorough review of the record, the Report and Recommendation, and the applicable
law, the court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the court adopts
and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in this Order. This matter is
REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas for the County of McCormick, State of South Carolina.
The Clerk of this Court is directed to forward the file along with a certified copy of this order to the
Clerk of Court for McCormick County.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Mary G. Lewis
United States District Judge

Spartanburg, South Carolina
August 28, 2013

2