Herman Clayton Burdette, Jr. v. Sean D. Jackson and Jared Attwood

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to the extent consistent with the order and summarily dismissed Herman Burdette’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice. The court declined to prohibit amendment because Burdette had not served the complaint and therefore retained an absolute right to amend before a responsive pleading was filed.

Holdings

1. When no timely objection is filed to a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court need not conduct de novo review and instead must satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.
2. The action was summarily dismissed without prejudice.
3. A plaintiff has an absolute right to amend a complaint once before a responsive pleading is filed and need not obtain leave of court to do so; because Burdette had not served the complaint and no responsive pleading had been filed, the court would not prohibit amendment.

Questions Presented

1. What standard of review applies when a party files no objections to a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation?
2. Whether the case should be summarily dismissed without prejudice after review of the Report and the record.
3. Whether the plaintiff could be denied leave to amend when the complaint had not been served and no responsive pleading had been filed.

Disposition

dismissed