Carter v. Reynolds
Petitioner: Tracey F Carter
Respondent: Cecilia Reynolds
Case Number: 1:2013cv02170
Filed: August 12, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Aiken Office
County: Lexington
Presiding Judge: Timothy M Cain
Presiding Judge: Shiva V Hodges
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
October 28, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 47 JUDGMENT / The court orders that this case is dismissed with prejudice. (abuc)
October 27, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER adopting 44 Report and Recommendation. This action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 10/27/2014.(abuc)
September 17, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER re 39 First MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. sec. 2241 filed by Cecilia Reynolds. Petitioner has failed to respond to the motion. As such, it appears to the court that he does not o ppose the motion and wishes to abandon this action. Based on the foregoing, it is ordered that Petitioner shall advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent's motion to dismiss by October 1, 2014. Petitioner is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V Hodges on 9/17/2014. (abuc)
June 26, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER ADOPTING 33 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 13 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Cecilia Reynolds. Respondent's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is denied without prejudice, and leave is granted to Respondent to file an amended return and/or motion for summary judgment within 45 days. This matter is recommitted to the magistrate judge for further handling. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 6/26/2014. (abuc)
March 24, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER re 13 First MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Cecilia Reynolds. Petitioner has failed to respond to the Respondent's motion for summary judgment. As such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose the motion and wishes to abandon this action. Petitioner is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent's motion for summary judgment by April 7, 2014. Petitioner is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V Hodges on 3/24/2014. (abuc)
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: Carter v. Reynolds
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Cecilia Reynolds
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 ]
Petitioner: Tracey F Carter
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?