Dawson v. Loving
Plaintiff: William Douglas Dawson, Jr
Defendant: Timothy Loving
Case Number: 4:2014cv03428
Filed: August 25, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Florence Office
County: Anderson
Presiding Judge: David C Norton
Presiding Judge: Thomas E Rogers
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 4, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER affirming 44 Report and Recommendation; granting 38 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable David C Norton on 2/4/2016.(eric, )
May 21, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 29 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 25 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 05/21/2015.(dsto, )
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dawson v. Loving
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: William Douglas Dawson, Jr
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Timothy Loving
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?