Holcomb v. Greenville County Clerk of Court et al
ORDER adopting and incorporating 8 Report and Recommendation; dismissing complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. It is further ordered this dismissal is without prejudice to Plaintiff's right to file an amended complaint within 28 days after the Court's Order, but that after such time, the dismissal becomes with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 9/12/2017. (mwal)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
DEAN ALTON HOLCOMB,
GREENVILLE COUNTY CLERK OF
COURT; PAUL B. WICKENSIMER;
DONNA BEARDEN; LETITIA HAMILTON
VERDIN; JUDGE GARRISON HILL,
G’ville, S.C.; MAGISTRATE JUDGE
JAMES HUDSON, G’ville, S.C.; ASST.
SOLICITOR SYLVIA HARRISON, G’ville,
S.C.; ASST. SOLICITOR RUSSELL D.
GHENT, Spartanburg, S.C.; WALT
WILKINS, 13th Circuit Solicitor; BARRY
BARNETTE, Spartanburg Solicitor; G’VILLE
PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE;
SPARTANBURG PUBLIC DEFENDER’S
OFFICE; JOHN VANDERMOSTEN,
G.C.D.C. Jail Administrator; WARDEN
TIM RILEY, Columbia, S.C. Kirkland C.I.;
GENERAL COUNSEL BARTON VINCENT,
S.C.D.C.; GENERAL COUNSEL ANNIE
RUMLER, S.C.D.C.; MS. ALBERT,
Kirkland Mail Supervisor; and MAGISTRATE
LELA FOSTER, all in their official and
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17-02001-MGL
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE
AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS
This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se.
matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United
States Magistrate Judge suggesting the Complaint be dismissed without prejudice and without
issuance and service of process.
The Report further recommends the dismissal be without
prejudice to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint within twenty-eight (28) days after the
Court’s order, but that after such time, the dismissal becomes with prejudice.
The Report was
made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court.
recommendation has no presumptive weight.
remains with the Court.
The responsibility to make a final determination
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 August 23, 2017, but Plaintiff failed to file any
objections to the Report.
“[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
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 this Court the Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and without
issuance and service of process.
It is further ORDERED this dismissal is without prejudice to
Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint within 28 days after the Court’s Order, but that
after such time, the dismissal becomes with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 12th day of September, 2017, in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are 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.
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?