Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Dealy v. Richardson, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Nicholas Dealy under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge, who recommended that relief be denied. Dealy failed to file timely objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation, despite being warned that this could waive his right to appellate review. As Dealy did not preserve his right to appellate review by objecting, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Dealy v. Richardson, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Nicholas Dealy under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge, who recommended that relief be denied. Dealy failed to file timely objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation, despite being warned that this could waive his right to appellate review. As Dealy did not preserve his right to appellate review by objecting, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-02-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-7533

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Nicholas Dealy under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge, who recommended that relief be denied. Dealy failed to file timely objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation, despite being warned that this could waive his right to appellate review. As Dealy did not preserve his right to appellate review by objecting, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    Dealy v. Richardson, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Nicholas Dealy under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge, who recommended that relief be denied. Dealy failed to file timely objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation, despite being warned that this could waive his right to appellate review. As Dealy did not preserve his right to appellate review by objecting, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 05-7533

    NICHOLAS DEALY,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    RICHARDSON, Captain; COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY;
    JUDGE LEARNER, Hampton City Circuit Court;
    DIRECTOR, VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS;
    JOHN & JANE DOE, and all deputies that worked
    the floor,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    Henry E. Hudson, District
    Judge. (CA-05-125-HEH)

    Submitted: January 26, 2006

    Decided:

    February 3, 2006

    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Nicholas Dealy, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Nicholas Dealy seeks to appeal the district court's order
    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) action.

    The district court

    referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.


    636(b)(1)(B) (2000).

    The magistrate judge recommended that

    relief be denied and advised Dealy 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,

    Dealy

    failed

    to

    object

    to

    the

    magistrate

    judge's

    recommendation.
    The timely filing of specific 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).

    Dealy 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

    - 2 -

    You might also like