From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Feaster v. Fed. Express Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION
Aug 28, 2014
C/A No. 2:13-cv-2517 DCN (D.S.C. Aug. 28, 2014)

Opinion

C/A No. 2:13-cv-2517 DCN

08-28-2014

Debra Feaster, Plaintiff, v. Federal Express Corporation, Defendant.


ORDER

The above referenced case is before this court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted and defendant's motion to dismiss be found as moot.

This court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984 ). Objections to the magistrate judge's report and

In Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985), the court held "that a pro se litigant must receive fair notification of the consequences of failure to object to a magistrate judge's report before such a procedural default will result in waiver of the right to appeal. The notice must be 'sufficiently understandable to one in appellant's circumstances fairly to appraise him of what is required.'" Id. at 846. Plaintiff was advised in a clear manner that his objections had to be filed within ten (10) days, and he received notice of the consequences at the appellate level of his failure to object to the magistrate judge's report.

recommendation were timely filed on August 25, 2014.

A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is AFFIRMED, and defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss is deemed MOOT.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/_________

David C. Norton

United States District Judge
August 28, 2014
Charleston, South Carolina

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified that any right to appeal this Order is governed by Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure


Summaries of

Feaster v. Fed. Express Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION
Aug 28, 2014
C/A No. 2:13-cv-2517 DCN (D.S.C. Aug. 28, 2014)
Case details for

Feaster v. Fed. Express Corp.

Case Details

Full title:Debra Feaster, Plaintiff, v. Federal Express Corporation, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION

Date published: Aug 28, 2014

Citations

C/A No. 2:13-cv-2517 DCN (D.S.C. Aug. 28, 2014)

Citing Cases

Feaster v. Fed. Express Corp.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Feaster v. Fed. Express Corp., No.…

Ashley v. Fed. Express Corp.

Docket 21 at 9 (first citing Docket 21-1 at 6 ¶ 26 (FedEx Statement of Undisputed Material Facts); then…