Michelle Hodges v. Gretchen D. Holland

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION Michelle Hodges, ) Case No. 6:25-cv-12590-JDA ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) OPINION AND ORDER ) Gretchen D. Holland, ) ) Appellee. ) This matter is before the Court on Appellant’s appeal of an order issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Carolina (the “Bankruptcy Court”) and a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) of the Magistrate Judge. [Docs. 1; 26.] In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald for pre-trial proceedings.

On March 13, 2026, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the Bankruptcy Court order be affirmed and that this appeal be dismissed. [Doc. 26.] The Magistrate further recommended that because “this is [Appellant’s] second meritless appeal of matters in one bankruptcy petition,” Appellant should “be warned regarding the entry of sanctions if she continues to file baseless bankruptcy appeals in this court.” [Id. at 5–6.] The Magistrate Judge also advised Appellant of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if she failed to do so. [Id. at 7.] Appellant has filed no objections and the time to do so has lapsed.

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270–71 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection is made. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The Court will review the Report only for clear error in the absence of an objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that “in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation” (internal quotation marks omitted)).

The Court has reviewed the record in this case, the applicable law, and the Report of the Magistrate Judge for clear error. Having done so, the Court accepts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and incorporates it by reference.

Accordingly, the Bankruptcy Court’s order is AFFIRMED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.

Appellant is further warned that, because this is her second meritless appeal of matters in a single bankruptcy petition, she may be subject to sanctions if she continues to file baseless bankruptcy appeals in this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Jacquelyn D. Austin United States District Judge April 10, 2026 Greenville, South Carolina NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to Rules and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.