Morris Law Office, P.C. v. Tatum

141 F. App'x 205
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 24, 2005·No. No. 05-1241·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

James Eddie Tatum and Ann Tatum appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting, in part, the Morris Law Office’s motion for summary judgment and Tee Engineering’s motion for summary judgment. We find that the Ta-tums failed to file timely objections to the magistrate judge’s report and have therefore waived appellate review of the substance of the recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir.1985). Accordingly, we affirm the decision 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Morris Law Office, P.C. v. Tatum, 141 F. App'x 205 (4th Cir. 2005).

141 F. App'x 205 (Morris Law Office, P.C. v. Tatum) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hawkins v. Fishbeck
301 F. Supp. 3d 650 (W.D. Virginia, 2017)