Drummond v. Spartanburg County Jail et al

Filing 127

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 116 ), and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court Defendants' motion for summary judgment (E CF No. 93 ) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's claims for denial of access to courts and medical indifference, and DENIED as to Plaintiff's claims related to due process; and Plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 115 ) is DENIE D.As per the Magistrate Judge's suggestion Defendants shall be provided an opportunity to submit additional briefing concerning Plaintiff's housing/classification and conditions of confinement claims in light of Dilworth. The Court will leave the briefing schedule of these matters to the sound discretion of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 1/25/2017. (mcot, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ORANGEBURG DIVISION
EDWARD DRUMMOND,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SARGENT BLACKWELL, Kitchen;
MAJOR NEAL URCH, Director;
ASLEY MCCANN, Legal; DET. BROCK;
and DET. REYES,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15-4713-MGL-KDW
§
§
§
§
§
§

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION,
GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO
PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS FOR ACCESS TO COURTS AND MEDICAL INDIFFERENCE
AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
AS TO PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS RELATED TO DUE PROCESS,
AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter
is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States
Magistrate Judge suggesting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted as to Plaintiff’s
claims for denial of access to courts and medical indifference; and denied as to Plaintiff’s claims
related to due process and that Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief be denied. The Magistrate
Judge also suggests Defendants be provided an opportunity to submit additional briefing concerning
Plaintiff’s housing/classification and conditions of confinement claims in light of Dilworth v.
Adams, 841 F.3d 246 (4th Cir. 2016). The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636
and Local Civil Rule 73.02 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 December 27, 2016, and the Clerk of Court entered
Plaintiff’s objections on January 3, 2017. The Court has carefully considered the objections, but
holds them to be without merit. Therefore, it will enter judgment accordingly.
Plaintiff fails to lodge any specific objections to the Report; and the Court is unable to locate
any clear error in the Report. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to amend his pleadings, the Court will
allow the Magistrate Judge to make that determination in the first instance.
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standards
set forth above, the Court overrules Plaintiff’s objections, adopts the Report, and incorporates it
herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is
GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s claims for denial of access to courts and medical indifference, and
DENIED as to Plaintiff’s claims related to due process; and Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief
is DENIED.
As per the Magistrate Judge’s suggestion Defendants shall be provided an opportunity to
submit additional briefing concerning Plaintiff’s housing/classification and conditions of
confinement claims in light of Dilworth. The Court will leave the briefing schedule of these matters
to the sound discretion of the Magistrate Judge.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 25th day of January, 2017, in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Plaintiff is hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date
hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

3