Doe v. Wilson et al
Plaintiff: John Doe
Defendant: Alan Wilson and Mark Keel
Case Number: 3:2021cv04108
Filed: December 22, 2021
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Presiding Judge: Mary Geiger Lewis
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 16, 2022 Filing 18 TEXT ORDER granting #17 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re #1 Complaint; granting #17 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #5 MOTION for Protective Order, MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym, #6 MOTION for Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, for a Preliminary Injunction, #9 MOTION to Seal Document. (Mark Keel answer due 3/18/2022; Alan Wilson answer due 3/18/2022; Response to Motion due by 3/18/2022) Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 2/16/2022.(cbru, )
February 16, 2022 Filing 17 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint; MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #5 MOTION for Protective Order, MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym, #6 MOTION for Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, for a Preliminary Injunction, #9 MOTION to Seal Document by Mark Keel, Alan Wilson. Response to Motion due by 3/2/2022. 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. No proposed order.(Leggett, Leon). Modified to correct motion relief and to add additional motion relief on 2/16/2022 (cbru, ). (Main Document 17 replaced on 2/16/2022) (cbru, ).
January 24, 2022 Filing 16 LETTER EXTENDING TIME TO ANSWER. Mark Keel answer due 2/17/2022; Alan Wilson answer due 2/17/2022.(Kirkland, Harley) Modified to edit text on 1/24/2022 (cbru, ).
January 24, 2022 Filing 15 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT by John Doe. Mark Keel served on 1/6/2022, answer due 1/27/2022. (Chaney, David) Modified to edit text on 1/24/2022 (cbru, ). (Main Document 15 replaced on 1/24/2022) (cbru, ). (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/24/2022: #1 Signed Acceptance) (cbru, ).
January 24, 2022 Filing 14 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT by John Doe. Alan Wilson served on 1/6/2022, answer due 1/27/2022. (Chaney, David) Modified to edit text on 1/24/2022 (cbru, ). (Main Document 14 replaced on 1/24/2022) (cbru, ). (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/24/2022: #1 Signed Acceptance) (cbru, ).
January 20, 2022 Filing 13 TEXT ORDER granting #11 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #5 MOTION for Protective Order, MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym; #6 MOTION for Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, for a Preliminary Injunction; #9 MOTION to Seal Document. (Response to Motion due by 2/17/2022) Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 1/20/2022.(cbru, ) Modified to edit text on 1/20/2022 (cbru, ).
January 20, 2022 Filing 11 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #5 MOTION for Protective Order, MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym; #6 MOTION for Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, for a Preliminary Injunction; #9 MOTION to Seal Document by Mark Keel, Alan Wilson. Response to Motion due by 2/3/2022. 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. No proposed order.(Smith, James) Modified to correct motion relief on 1/20/2022 (cbru, ).
January 20, 2022 Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by James Emory Smith, Jr on behalf of Mark Keel, Alan Wilson (Smith, James)
December 22, 2021 Filing 9 MOTION to Seal Document by John Doe. Response to Motion due by 1/5/2022. 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. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Non-Confidential Descriptive Index of Documents to Seal, #2 Memo in Support of Motion to File Documents Under Seal Pursuant to Local Rule 5.03)No proposed order.(Chaney, David)
December 22, 2021 Filing 8 Summons Issued as to Mark Keel. (cbru, )
December 22, 2021 Filing 7 Summons Issued as to Alan Wilson. (cbru, )
December 22, 2021 Filing 6 MOTION for Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, for a Preliminary Injunction by John Doe. Response to Motion due by 1/5/2022. 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. (Attachments: #1 Memo in Support, #2 Request to Take Judicial Notice of Readily Determinable Facts Under Fed. R. Evid. 201, #3 Exhibit A - Indictment, #4 Exhibit B - Warrant, #5 Exhibit C - Sentence, #6 Exhibit D - Pardon, #7 Exhibit E - Registry Entry)No proposed order.(Chaney, David) Modified to edit text on 12/22/2021 (cbru, ).
December 22, 2021 Filing 5 MOTION for Protective Order, MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym by John Doe. Response to Motion due by 1/5/2022. 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. (Attachments: #1 Memo in Support)No proposed order.(Chaney, David). Modified to edit text and to add additional motion relief on 12/22/2021 (cbru, ).
December 22, 2021 Filing 4 TEXT ORDER: Plaintiff filed this case as "John Doe vs. Alan Wilson, etc., et al". Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a), unless Plaintiff seeks and receives permission from the Court, he cannot proceed anonymously. See James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d 233, 238 (4th Cir. 1993). By January 5, 2022, Plaintiff shall either file an amended complaint in his true name or a motion to proceed anonymously. "A plaintiff seeking to proceed anonymously must show that [he or she] has a substantial privacy right that outweighs the customary and constitutionally-embedded presumption of openness in judicial proceedings." Richard S. v. Sebelius, C/A No. 3:12-cv-00007-TMC, 2012 WL 1909344, at *1 (D.S.C. May 25, 2012). IT IS SO ORDERED. (Amended Complaint/Motion due by 1/5/2022) Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 12/22/2021. (cbru, )
December 22, 2021 Filing 3 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by John Doe.(cbru, )
December 22, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Mark Keel, Alan Wilson (Filing fee $402 receipt number ASCDC-10248987) filed by John Doe. Service due by 3/22/2022(cbru, )

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: Doe v. Wilson et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: John Doe
Represented By: David Allen Chaney, 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: Alan Wilson
Represented By: Alan Wilson
Represented By: Harley Littleton Kirkland
Represented By: James Emory Smith, Jr
Represented By: Leon David Leggett
Represented By: Robert Dewayne Cook
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: Mark Keel
Represented By: Harley Littleton Kirkland
Represented By: James Emory Smith, Jr
Represented By: Leon David Leggett
Represented By: Alan Wilson
Represented By: Robert Dewayne Cook
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?