Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Sherman v. Orangeburg County, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Curlee Sherman's appeal of the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge, who recommended denying relief. Sherman failed to file timely objections to the magistrate's recommendation, despite being warned this could waive his right to appellate review. As Sherman did not object after receiving proper notice, the Fourth Circuit found he had waived his right to appellate review and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-11-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-1335

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Curlee Sherman's appeal of the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge, who recommended denying relief. Sherman failed to file timely objections to the magistrate's recommendation, despite being warned this could waive his right to appellate review. As Sherman did not object after receiving proper notice, the Fourth Circuit found he had waived his right to appellate review and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views2 pages

    Sherman v. Orangeburg County, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Curlee Sherman's appeal of the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge, who recommended denying relief. Sherman failed to file timely objections to the magistrate's recommendation, despite being warned this could waive his right to appellate review. As Sherman did not object after receiving proper notice, the Fourth Circuit found he had waived his right to appellate review and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-1335

    CURLEE SHERMAN,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    ORANGEBURG COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT,
    Defendant - Appellee,
    and
    LEXINGTON COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT,
    Defendant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
    Margaret B. Seymour, District
    Judge. (CA-03-4072-5)

    Submitted:

    October 15, 2004

    Decided:

    November 17, 2004

    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Curlee Sherman, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Curlee Sherman seeks to appeal the district courts order
    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice.
    The

    district

    court

    referred

    this

    case

    to

    pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) (2000).

    magistrate

    judge

    The magistrate judge

    recommended that relief be denied and advised Sherman that failure


    to file timely, specific objections to this recommendation could
    waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the
    recommendation.

    Despite this warning, Sherman failed to object to

    the magistrate judges recommendation.


    The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate
    judges recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of
    the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been
    warned that failure to object will waive appellate review.

    See

    Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also
    Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).

    Sherman has waived appellate

    review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice.


    Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss
    the appeal.
    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
    legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
    the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 2 -

    You might also like