Cox v. Rhodes et al
| Jerritt Cox |
| Director Marcus Rhodes and Director of Medical Beth Lawson |
| 1:2022cv03059 |
| September 9, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Aiken Office |
| Joseph Dawson |
| Shiva V Hodges |
| Prison:Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr (Other) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 19, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 14
Mail Returned as Undeliverable/Return to Sender/Unable to Forward. Addressee: Jerritt Cox. Document Returned: #10 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re #1 Complaint filed by Jerritt Cox. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (dist)
|
|
Filing 11
***DOCUMENT MAILED #10 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION placed in U.S. Mail from Columbia Clerks Office to Jerritt Cox, 271065, 4150 J. Rueben Long Ave., Conway, SC 29526. (lbak)
|
|
Filing 10
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that this action be dismissed with prejudice, in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Clerk is directed to send this Report and Recommendation to Plaintiff at his last known address. If Plaintiff notifies the court within the time set for filing objections to this Report and Recommendation that he wishes to continue with this case and provides a current address, the Clerk is directed to vacate this Report and Recommendation and return this file to the undersigned for further handling. If, however, no objections are filed, the Clerk shall forward this Report and Recommendation to the district judge for disposition. Objections to R&R due by 10/11/2022. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges on 9/26/2022. (lbak)
|
|
Filing 9
Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Return To Sender. Not Deliverable As Addressed. Unable To Forward. Released. Addressee: Jerritt Cox. Document Returned: #6 Proper Form Order and #7 Order. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (lbak)
|
|
Filing 8
***DOCUMENTS MAILED #6 Proper Form Order, #7 Order and Notice, standard complaint form, one IFP Application and two Forms USM-285 placed in U.S. Mail from Columbia Clerks Office to Jerritt Cox, 271065, 4150 J. Rueben Long Ave., Conway, SC 29526 and Kirkland R&E Center, A!-52-B, 4344 Broad River Rd., Columbia, SC 29210. (lbak)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER AND NOTICE Plaintiff may attempt to correct the defects in his #1 complaint by filing an amended complaint by October 4, 2022, along with any appropriate service documents. Plaintiff is reminded an amended complaint replaces the original complaint and should be complete in itself. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint or fails to cure the deficiencies identified above, the undersigned will recommend to the district court that the claims specified above be dismissed without leave for further amendment. (Specific Document due by 10/4/2022.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges on 9/13/2022. (lbak)
|
|
Filing 6
PROPER FORM ORDER Case to be brought into proper form by 10/4/2022. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges on 9/13/2022. (lbak)
|
|
Filing 3
TRUE DIVISION FOR TRIAL: Florence. (lbak)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Beth Lawson, Marcus Rhodes, filed by Jerritt Cox. (Attachments: #1 Envelope 1, #2 Envelope 2) (lbak)
|
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 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.
