Footman v. Banks et al

Filing 23

ORDER accepting the 18 Report and Recommendation, terminating Plaintiff's 22 motion to stay as moot, and dismissing the action for the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L. Wooten on 3/22/2017. (bgoo)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Ron Christopher Footman, #237013

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Martin R. Banks and Karen Fryar
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

C/A No.: 5:16-1840-TLW-SVH

ORDER

Plaintiff Ron Christopher Footman, a prisoner 1 proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,
filed this action against public defender Martin R. Banks and solicitor Karen Fryar (collectively
“Defendants”), alleging violations of his constitutional rights. ECF No. 1. This matter is before
the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by United States Magistrate
Judge Hodges to whom this case was previously assigned. ECF No. 18. In the R&R, the
Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing the complaint without prejudice and without issuance
and service of process. No objections were filed and the time to do so has expired. 2
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s R&R to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence
of objections to the R&R, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the
recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

1

Plaintiff was incarcerated in Ridgeland Correctional Institution when he filed this action, but was
subsequently released on July 1, 2016. ECF No. 9.
2
Plaintiff asserts he did not receive the R&R upon the Clerk’s initial mailing on July 29, 2016.
ECF Nos. 19, 21. The Clerk resent the R&R and on September 29, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion
to stay the case to allow him time to obtain counsel. ECF No. 22. Since the filing of that motion,
6 months have passed and Plaintiff has yet to identify any counsel or file objections to the R&R.
In light of these circumstances and the analysis set forth in the R&R Plaintiff’s motion to stay is
terminated as moot.

This Court carefully reviewed the record in this case and the Magistrate Judge’s R&R, and
notes that Plaintiff filed no objections. After appropriate consideration, the Magistrate Judge’s
R&R is hereby ACCEPTED. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, the case is
DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Terry L. Wooten
Chief United States District Judge
March 22, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina