Kidd v. Edwards, (4th Cir. 2001)

Text

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-1828 JAMES W. KIDD, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

TOMMY B. EDWARDS; VALERIE DH KIDD, a/k/a

Valerie DH Hughes; DARRYL GUY DAVID, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge.

(CA-01-630-8)

Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001

Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James W. Kidd, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM

James W. Kidd, Jr. appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. Kidd’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Kidd 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, Kidd 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. See Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Kidd 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

---