Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01549/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01549-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1549

DORIAN HADDOCK,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

TRIBUTE PROPERTIES,

Defendant – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, 

Chief District Judge. (4:09-cv-00080-FL)

Submitted: July 27, 2010 Decided: August 5, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit 

Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dorian Haddock, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Murchison, MURCHISON,

TAYLOR & GIBSON, PLLC, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-1549 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/05/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Dorian Haddock appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

granting defendant’s motion to dismiss. The district court 

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

§ 636(b)(1) (West 2006 & Supp. 2010). The magistrate judge 

recommended that relief be denied and advised Haddock 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). 

Haddock has waived appellate review by failing to file specific 

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

Appeal: 10-1549 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/05/2010 Pg: 2 of 2