Paulin v. Smith

Filing 32

ORDER adopting REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23 , granting defendant's motion for summary judgment 11 , and denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment 21 . Signed by Honorable G Ross Anderson, Jr on 2/13/09. (ncha, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION

Lawrence C. Paulin, Jr.,

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Franklin Smith, Former Chief Jailer, ) ) Defendant. ) ______________________________________ )

C/A No. 6:08-cv-0067-GRA

ORDER (Written Opinion)

This matter comes before the Court to review the magistrate's Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), D.S.C., filed on December 24, 2008. Plaintiff originally filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The magistrate now recommends that this Court grant the

defendant's motion for summary judgement and dismiss the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated herein, this Court adopts the magistrate's recommendation. Plaintiff brings this claim pro se. This Court is required to construe pro se pleadings liberally. Such pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys. See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978). This Court is charged with liberally construing a pleading filed by a pro se litigant to allow for the development of a potentially meritorious claim. See Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982).

Page 1 of 3

The magistrate makes only a recommendation to this Court.

The

recommendation has no presumptive weight, and responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and this Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court may also "receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate with instructions." Id. In the absence of specific objections to the Report and Recommendation, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198 (4th. Cir. 1983). The plaintiff filed a motion to extend time to file objections on January 12, 2009. The Court granted an extension to file objections the next day. The Court gave the plaintiff until February 2, 2009 to file objections. The plaintiff has not filed any objections. After a review of the magistrate's Report and Recommendation, applicable case law, and the record, this Court finds that the magistrate applied sound legal principles to the facts of this case. Recommendation in its entirety. Therefore, this Court adopts the Report and

Page 2 of 3

IT IS THEREFORE SO ORDERED THAT the defendant's motion for summary judgment be GRANTED and the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 13 , 2009 Anderson, South Carolina

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has the right to appeal this Order within thirty (30) days from the date of its entry. Failure to meet this deadline, as modified by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, will waive the right to appeal.

Page 3 of 3