Jackson v. Florence County Detention Center et al

Filing 29

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant; finding as moot 25 Motion for Extension of Time; finding as moot 27 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution. The case is DISMISSED. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L Wooten on 3/28/2017.(cwhi, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Elijah Antwan Jackson,
C/A No. 9:16-cv-1827-TLW
Plaintiff,
v.
Florence County Detention Center, Sergeant
Ingram, Corporal Eli, Officer Timmons and
Medical Staff,

ORDER

Defendants.
Plaintiff Elijah Antwan Jackson, who at the time this action was filed was a pretrial detainee
at the Florence County Detention Center proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 alleging violations of his constitutional rights. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff asserts Defendants
failed to properly protect him from other inmates and failed to treat a knot on his head that arose
after a fight with another inmate. Id. at 6-8.
The matter now comes before this Court for review of two Report and Recommendations
(R&Rs) filed by Magistrate Judge Rogers, to whom this case was assigned pursuant to the
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), DSC. ECF Nos. 16, 19.
In the first R&R, the Magistrate Judge recommends partial summary dismissal as to Defendants
Florence County Detention Center and “Medical Staff” on the grounds that these defendants are
not “persons” subject to suit under § 1983. ECF No. 16 at 2-3. In the second R&R, the Magistrate
Judge recommends dismissing the entire action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)
due to Plaintiff’s failure to keep the Court advised of his address after his release. ECF No. 19 at
1-2. The time to file objections to each R&R has expired and Plaintiff did not file objections.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s R&Rs to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in

whole or in part, the recommendations contained in the R&Rs. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence
of objections to an 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).
This Court carefully reviewed the R&Rs and accepts the analysis set forth by the
Magistrate Judge. Noting that there were no objections by Plaintiff and his release from the
Florence County Detention Center, it is reasonable to conclude he has abandoned his claims. After
appropriate consideration, the Magistrate Judge’s R&Rs are hereby ACCEPTED. For the reasons
articulated by the Magistrate Judge, the case is DISMISSED. 1
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Terry L. Wooten
Chief United States District Judge
March 28, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina

In light of this ruling, Defendants Corporal Eli, Sergeant Ingram, and Officer Timmons’s pending
motion to dismiss and motion to extend time, ECF Nos. 25 and 27, are hereby terminated as moot.
1

2