Summary
The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina reviews a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation recommending summary judgment for the defendants in Derrick DL Brunson’s civil action. After conducting a de novo review despite the absence of timely objections, the Court accepts the recommendation and grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should accept the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation where Plaintiff filed no specific objections.
- Whether Defendants were entitled to summary judgment.
Holdings
- When no specific objection is filed, 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 before accepting the recommendation.
- Defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted.
Key quotations
“The Court will review the Report only for clear error in the absence of an objection.”
“Accordingly, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment [Doc. 64] is GRANTED.”
Factual background
The opinion provides no substantive factual account of the alleged conduct underlying Plaintiff's prisoner civil-rights claims. It addresses Defendants' motion for summary judgment and Plaintiff's failure to file specific objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation.
Procedural history
The magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on January 23, 2026, recommending that Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. Plaintiff did not file timely objections, and the district court reviewed the Report for clear error but, out of caution, also conducted a de novo review of the Report, record, and applicable law. The court accepted and incorporated the Report and Recommendation and granted Defendants' motion for summary judgment.