AS et al v. South Carolina Department of Social Services et al
| AS and CJ |
| South Carolina Department of Social Services, Tasha Barkley, Lakisha M Hamilton, Shaneka Dixon, Kelly McCabe, Dana S Pressley, Amanda Quinlan-Head (Graham), Deborah Reynolds, Yolanda M Gamble Speights, Latoya Jackson and Michael Leach |
| 2:2023cv05621 |
| November 3, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Bruce Howe Hendricks |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 3, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Tasha Barkley, Shaneka Dixon, Yolanda M Gamble Speights, Lakisha M Hamilton, Latoya Jackson, Michael Leach, Kelly McCabe, Dana S Pressley, Amanda Quinlan-Head (Graham), Deborah Reynolds, South Carolina Department of Social Services. (gray) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Clarendon Court of Common Pleas, case number 2023CP1400356. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ASCDC-11410935), filed by Michael Leach, Latoya Jackson, Lakisha M Hamilton, Deborah Reynolds, South Carolina Department of Social Services, Tasha Barkley, Dana S Pressley, Kelly McCabe, Amanda Quinlan-Head (Graham), Shaneka Dixon, Yolanda M Gamble Speights. (Attachments: #1 State Court Documents, #2 Affidavit of Daniel C. Plyler) (gray) |
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.
