Johnson v. Richland Cty Sheriff ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 95-7607
    ROBERT LEWIS JOHNSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Greenville. William M. Catoe, Jr., Magistrate
    Judge. (CA-95-3104-6-3AK)
    Submitted:   February 7, 1996           Decided:    February 26, 1996
    Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Robert Lewis Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his
    
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     (1988) complaint without prejudice. Appellant's
    case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (b)(1)(B) (1988). The magistrate judge recommended that relief
    be denied and advised Appellant that failure to file timely objec-
    tions to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a
    district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this
    warning, Appellant failed to file specific objections to the magis-
    trate judge's recommendation.
    The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge's
    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. Wright v.
    Collins, 
    766 F.2d 841
    , 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). See generally Thomas
    v. Arn, 
    474 U.S. 140
     (1985). Appellant has waived appellate review
    by failing to file specific objections after receiving proper
    notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
    tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
    and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 95-7607

Filed Date: 2/26/1996

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021