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, )

Download PDF
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

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?