Seabrooke v. Pickens County Law Enforcement Center et al

Filing 31

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 23 Report and Recommendation. the Court adopts and incorporates the Magistrate Judges Report (ECF No. 23) and dismisses Plaintiffs complaint with prejudice and without issuance and service of process as to Defendants Pickens County Law Enforcement Center, Pickens County Jail, Pickens County Solicitors Office, Rita Burgess, and Baker Cleveland. The case shall continue as to Defendants K. Leopard and Charles Way. Signed by Honorable Bruce Howe Hendricks on 7/24/2018. (kric, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Michael L. Seabrooke,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Pickens County Law Enforcement
)
Center, Pickens County Solicitor’s
)
Office, Pickens County Jail, Rita
)
Burgess, K. Leopard, Charles Way,
)
and Baker Cleveland,
)
)
Defendants.
)
________________________________)

Civil Action No. 8:18-1066-BHH

ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon Plaintiff Michael L. Seabrooke’s pro se
complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his complaint, Plaintiff, who is a pretrial
detainee at Pickens County Jail, alleges violations of his constitutional rights.

In

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d) (D.S.C.), the
matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for preliminary determinations.
On June 29, 2018, Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald issued a report and
recommendation (“Report”) outlining Plaintiff’s claims and noting that although the Court
gave Plaintiff the opportunity to correct certain defects in his complaint, the amended
complaint fails to correct the identified deficiencies and fails to state a claim against all of
the Defendants aside from Defendants K. Leopard and Charles Way. Accordingly, the
Magistrate Judge’s Report recommends that the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint with
prejudice and without issuance and service of process as to Defendants Pickens County
Law Enforcement Center, Pickens County Jail, Pickens County Solicitor’s Office, Rita
Burgess, and Baker Cleveland. The Report further recommends that the case continue as

to Defendants K. Leopard and Charles Way. Attached to the Report was a notice advising
Plaintiff of his right to file written objections to the Report within fourteen days of being
served with a copy. To date, no objections have been filed.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to the Court.

The

recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final
determination remains with the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The Court
is charged with making a de novo determination only of those portions of the Report to
which specific objections are made, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole
or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, or recommit the matter to the
Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of specific
objections, the Court reviews the matter only for clear error. See Diamond v. Colonial Life
& Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that “in 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.’”) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
Here, because no objections have been filed, the Court has reviewed the record, the
applicable law, and the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge for clear
error. After review, the Court finds no clear error and agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s
recommendations. Therefore, the Court adopts and incorporates the Magistrate Judge’s
Report (ECF No. 23) and dismisses Plaintiff’s complaint with prejudice and without
issuance and service of process as to Defendants Pickens County Law Enforcement
Center, Pickens County Jail, Pickens County Solicitor’s Office, Rita Burgess, and Baker
Cleveland. The case shall continue as to Defendants K. Leopard and Charles Way.
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Bruce H. Hendricks
The Honorable Bruce Howe Hendricks
United States District Judge
July 24, 2018
Charleston, South Carolina

3