Brave v. South Carolina Highway Department

Full title: Laocia S. Brave, Plaintiff, v. South Carolina Highway Department, and…

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

Date published: May 6, 2008

C.A. No. 4:07-3457-HMH-TER (D.S.C. May. 6, 2008)

Opinion

C.A. No. 4:07-3457-HMH-TER.

May 6, 2008

OPINION AND ORDER

HENRY HERLONG JR., District Judge

This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) 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 this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2006).

The Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, 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).

After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Rogers' Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore

ORDERED that this matter is remanded to the Court of Common Pleas for Georgetown County.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The Plaintiff is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this order within thirty (30) days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.