# Brown v. Dunbar

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · January 12, 2011 · 407 F. App'x 662

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/182673

## Case

- **Full name:** Vernon Samuel BROWN, A/K/A Vernon S. Brown, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Correctional Officer Danny DUNBAR; Sgt. Angla Collins, Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 12, 2011
- **Citations:** 407 F. App'x 662
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Niemeyer, Gregory, Shedd
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/182673

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6723

VERNON SAMUEL BROWN, a/k/a Vernon S. Brown,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DANNY DUNBAR; SGT. ANGLA COLLINS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(9:09-cv-00920-RBH-BM)

Submitted: December 22, 2010 Decided: January 12, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vernon Samuel Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Hodges Waldron,
Jr., GRIFFITH & SADLER, P.A., Beaufort, South Carolina, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Vernon Samuel Brown appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. The

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant

to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2010). The

magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised

Brown that failure to file timely objections to this

recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court

order based upon the 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 of the consequences of

noncompliance. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th

Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Brown

has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after

receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of

the district court.

We deny as moot appellees’ motion to dismiss the

appeal. 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/182673. Public record. Not legal advice.