David E. Camby v. Larry Davis James M. Lester
- Decided
- October 3, 1983
- Docket
- 82-6070
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,354 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that districts courts may adopt proposed findings and recommendations without explanation in the absence of objections — Nutter v. Kijakazi (2021)
- holding that district courts may adopt proposed findings and recommendations without explanation in the absence of objections — Hanna v. O'Malley (2024)
- holding that districts courts may adopt proposed findings and recommendations without explanation in the absence of objections — Howerton v. Saul (2019)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
WIDENER, Circuit Judge:
This case presents the question of what action a district court must take upon a magistrate’s proposed findings and recommendations on a dispositive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) when there is no objection made to the magistrate’s proposal.
The plaintiff in this § 1983 action, David Camby, was indicted for second-degree burglary, and subsequently arrested by the defendant police officers, Larry Davis and James Lester, pursuant to a court order. After the North Carolina Superior Court set bond for pre-trial release, Camby was incarcerated in an Iredell County Prison unit. Before trial, the prosecutor obtained a voluntary dismissal of the charges, stating Camby had been improperly charged, and that the State would seek a new indictment.
Statutes cited
Cite this
David E. Camby v. Larry Davis James M. Lester, 718 F.2d 198 (1983)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.