Beckman v. Horry County Police Department et al
Plaintiff: Bruce A Beckman
Defendant: Horry County Police Department and Ryan Seipt
Case Number: 4:2015cv03410
Filed: August 26, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Florence Office
County: Horry
Presiding Judge: R Bryan Harwell
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
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
January 17, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 70 ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court adopts and incorporates by reference the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 65 ] of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this case with prejudice f or failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(b). The Court DENIES AS MOOT Defendant's motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 55 ]. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 1/17/2017. (mcot, )
November 16, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 61 ORDER: Plaintiff is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 55 ) by December 16, 2016. Plaintiff 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 Kaymani D West on 11/16/2016. (mcot, )
April 26, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court adopts and incorporates by reference the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 28 ] of the Magistrate Judge. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant Horry County Police Department is DISMISSED from this action without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 4/26/2016. (mcot, )
November 18, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court respectfully declines to conduct a de novo review of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 8 ] at this time. The Court REFERS this matter back to the Magistrate Judge for consideration of Plaintiff's motion to amend [ECF No. 10 ] and further pretrial handling. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 11/18/2015. (mcot, )
September 23, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER directing Clerk not to authorize service and advising plaintiff to notify Clerk in writing of any change of address. Plaintiff has incurred a debt to the U.S.A. in the amount of $350.00 Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 9/23/2015. (mcot, )
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: Beckman v. Horry County Police Department 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: Bruce A Beckman
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: Horry County Police Department
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: Ryan Seipt
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?