Wilson v. Braham

Filing 11

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court adopts the Report 9 and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court that Plaintiff's action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 03/29/2016. (dsto, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION IRVIN JEFFERSON WILSON, aka Irvin Jefferson Wilson, Plaintiff, § § § § vs. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:15-4835-MGL § OFFICER BRAHAM; § BENJAMIN COTHRAN; § MICHAEL ONELL; OFFICER COLLIER; § OFFICER MUNOZ; CHARLES COTHRAN; § SHERIFF STEVE LOFTIS, Police Officer; § Greenville Law Enforcement; § STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; § E. POWERS PRICE, Esquire; § ALEX STALVEY, Esquire; § ALLEN WILSON, Attorney General, § State of SC; W. WALTER WILKINS, § Solicitor; MARK MOYER, Assistant § Solicitor; Thirteenth Judicial Circuit; § KNOX WHITE, Mayor, Greenville, S.C.; § DARREN VAUGHN; EDWARD IRICK; § OFFICER HARVELL; KITTY HYATT; § S. BROWN; WAYNE SHEPARDSON, § Foreman, Grand Jury, Thirteenth Judicial § Circuit, Greenville, South Carolina; § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE This is 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 to the Court that Plaintiff’s action be dismissed without prejudice. 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 March 29, 2016, but Plaintiff 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 that Plaintiff’s action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 29th day of March, 2016, in Columbia, South Carolina. s/ Mary G. Lewis MARY G. 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. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?