Opinion

Stepney v. Beckwith

  • 360 F. App'x 418
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Jan 6, 2010
Status
Published
On the bench
Agee, Motz, Wilkinson
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Wade Stepney, Jr. appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. In its final order, the district court stated that Stepney had not filed objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation, and the court was therefore not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Following his timely appeal, Stepney wrote a letter to the district court informing the court that he had mailed objections and questioning whether the court had received them. Upon review, the district court discovered the objections had been inadvertently overlooked.

The district court has requested that this case be returned to the district court so that Stepney’s objections may be addressed. We grant the district court’s request and order a limited remand for that purpose. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a); Fobian v. Storage Tech. Corp., 164 F.3d 887 (4th Cir.1999). The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration. If still dissatisfied, the parties can also appeal to this court from any subsequent final order of the district court.

REMANDED.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.