Snyder v. Dunlap et al

Filing 59

AMENDED ORDER Adopting the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Molly H. Cherry and granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 1/7/2022. (cwhi, ) (Main Document 59 replaced on 1/7/2022 to correct signature date) (rshu, ).

Download PDF
9:20-cv-01909-MGL Date Filed 01/07/22 Entry Number 59 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION MARK ALLAN SNYDER, Plaintiff, vs. DAVID W. DUNLAP, Warden; LULA MILLER, Lieutenant; CHARLES J. ROMANIELLO, Sergeant; and GREGORY McCOY, Officer, Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § Civil Action No. 9:20-01909-MGL AMENDED ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Mark Allan Snyder (Snyder), proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the above-named Defendants. This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge recommending Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted. 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 9:20-cv-01909-MGL Date Filed 01/07/22 Entry Number 59 Page 2 of 2 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 December 9, 2021, and the Clerk of Court docketed Snyder’s objections on January 3, 2022. The Court has reviewed the objections, but holds them to be without merit. It will therefore enter judgment accordingly. Here, Snyder has wholly failed to bring any specific objections to the Report. Instead, he merely makes arguments the Magistrate Judge has already considered and rejected. Inasmuch as the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s treatment of those issues, it need not repeat the discussion here. Consequently, because Snyder neglects to make any specific objections, and the Court has found no clear error, it need not make a de novo review of the record before overruling Snyder’s objections and accepting the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. 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 Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and Snyder’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 7th day of January 2022, 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. 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?