Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Carson v. Reynolds

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division

October 30, 2014

Denon D. Carson, Jr., Plaintiff,
v.
Cecilia Reynolds, Jerry Washington, and Phillip Riggins, Defendants.

ORDER

TIMOTHY M. CAIN, District Judge.

Plaintiff Denon D. Carson, Jr., a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the court is the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation ("Report"), recommending that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Cecilia Reynolds and Phillip Riggins (ECF No. 55) be granted; Plaintiff's case be dismissed; and the court deem any outstanding motions as moot. (ECF No. 88).[1] Plaintiff timely filed objections. (ECF No. 90).

The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court need not conduct a de novo review when a party makes only "general and conclusory objections that do not direct the court to a specific error in the magistrate's proposed findings and recommendations." Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). In that case, the court reviews the Report only for clear error. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).

As set forth above, Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Report. (ECF No. 90). The court has thoroughly reviewed the Report, Plaintiff's objections, and the record in this case and finds no reason to deviate from the Report's recommended disposition. Based on the foregoing, the court finds Plaintiff's objections are without merit.

Accordingly, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report (ECF No. 88) and incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Cecilia Reynolds and Phillips Riggins (ECF No. 55) is GRANTED, the case is DISMISSED, and the remaining pending motions (ECF Nos. 78, 87, 94, 95, 99, and 100) are DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.