Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10 views

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Cornelius Tucker Jr. appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaints. The case was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended relief be denied and a pre-filing injunction imposed. Tucker failed to file objections to the magistrate's recommendation, despite being warned this would waive his right to appellate review. By not filing objections after receiving notice, Tucker waived his right to appellate review. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    Cornelius Tucker Jr. appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaints. The case was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended relief be denied and a pre-filing injunction imposed. Tucker failed to file objections to the magistrate's recommendation, despite being warned this would waive his right to appellate review. By not filing objections after receiving notice, Tucker waived his right to appellate review. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1995-02-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 50 F.3d 8 Docket: 94-7397

    Original Title

    Cornelius Tucker, Jr. v. Sergeant R. Samuel Wilford Shields, Superintendent Lynn C. Phillips, Director Regina Brooks Officer Sutton J. Kennedy, Clerk, Wake County Court Officer Davis Gary Dixon, Warden James Taylor, 50 F.3d 8, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Cornelius Tucker Jr. appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaints. The case was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended relief be denied and a pre-filing injunction imposed. Tucker failed to file objections to the magistrate's recommendation, despite being warned this would waive his right to appellate review. By not filing objections after receiving notice, Tucker waived his right to appellate review. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    10 views2 pages

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Cornelius Tucker Jr. appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaints. The case was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended relief be denied and a pre-filing injunction imposed. Tucker failed to file objections to the magistrate's recommendation, despite being warned this would waive his right to appellate review. By not filing objections after receiving notice, Tucker waived his right to appellate review. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    50 F.

    3d 8

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    Cornelius TUCKER, Jr., Plaintiff--Appellant,
    v.
    Sergeant R. SAMUEL; Wilford Shields, Superintendent; Lynn
    C. Phillips, Director; Regina Brooks; Officer Sutton; J.
    Kennedy, Clerk, Wake County Court; Officer Davis; Gary
    Dixon, Warden; James Taylor, Defendants--Appellees.
    No. 94-7397.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Jan. 19, 1995.
    Decided Feb. 22, 1995.

    Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983
    (1988) complaints. Appellant's case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant
    to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(b)(1)(B) (1988). The magistrate judge recommended that
    relief be denied and a pre-filing injunction be imposed. Further, the magistrate
    judge advised Appellant that failure to file timely objections to this
    recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based
    upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Appellant failed to object to
    the magistrate 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 objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm
    the judgment of the district court. 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.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like