Nelson v. Marshall et al
| Antonio Lamar Nelson |
| C Marshall and Melron Kelly |
| 0:2007cv03974 |
| December 11, 2007 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Rock Hill Office |
| Richland |
| R Bryan Harwell |
| Bristow Marchant |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
76
ORDER ADOPTING 72 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, dismissing this action with prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b). Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 10/22/10. (rpol, )
|
|
Filing
53
ORDER adopting as modified 50 Report and Recommendation; denying 35 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. The action is stayed pending a conviction or dismissal of the underlying criminal charges in the state trial court. The parties are directed to notify the Court upon disposition of the state court matter. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 11/19/2008.(mwel, )
|
|
Filing
50
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant that to the extent the Defendants' motion seeks dismissal of this action, that that request be denied, and that instead the Court issue a stay of this case pending resolution of Plaintiffs criminal charges. Objections to R&R due by 11/10/2008. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant on 10/24/08. (rpol, )
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
