Garth v. City of Aberdeen, Mississippi

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION LADY B. GARTH PLAINTIFF V. NO. 1:24-CV-70-DMB-RP CITY OF ABERDEEN, MISSISSIPPI; CHARLES SCOTT, Mayor of the City of Aberdeen, Mississippi; MONROE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI; and STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DEFENDANTS

ORDER On September 6, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Roy Percy issued a “Report and Recommendation” (“R&R”) recommending that Lady B. Garth’s claims against the City of Aberdeen, Mississippi, be dismissed without prejudice.! Doc. #25 at 1. The R&R warned that “failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations in [the R&R] within 14 days after being served with a copy bars ... (1) entitlement to de novo review by a district judge of proposed findings and recommendations, ... and (2) appellate review, except on grounds of plain error ....” /d. at 2 (citations omitted). No objection to the R&R was filed. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), “[a] judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report ... to which objection is made.” “[P]lain error review applies where a party did not object to a magistrate judge’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, or recommendation to the district court despite being served with notice of the consequences of failing to object.” Quintero v. State of Texas — Health and Hum. Servs. Comm’n, No. 22-50916, 2023 WL 5236785, at *2 (5th Cir. Aug. 15, 2023) (cleaned up). “[WJ]here there is no objection,

' The R&R followed Garth’s failure to respond to Judge Percy’s August 5 order requiring Garth to show cause why her claims against the City should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Doc. #25 at 1.

the Court need only determine whether the report and recommendation is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” United States v. Alaniz, 278 F. Supp. 3d 944, 948 (S.D. Tex. 2017). Because the Court reviewed the R&R for plain error and concludes the R&R is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law, the R&R [25] is ADOPTED as the order of the Court. Garth’s claims against the City are DISMISSED without prejudice. SO ORDERED, this Ist day of October, 2024. /s/Debra M. Brown UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE