Waters v. Stewart et al
| Thomas Bradford Waters |
| John Stewart, Mark Strickland, Anthony Backhuss, Jody Cooper and Alan C Townsend |
| 4:2015cv04143 |
| October 2, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Florence Office |
| Florence |
| G Ross Anderson |
| Thomas E Rogers |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
238
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objections, ADOPTS AS MODIFIED the Magistrate Judge's R&R (ECF No. 228 ) to the extent it is consistent with this Order, GRANTS Defendants&# 039; supplemental motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 206 ), and DISMISSES Plaintiff's excessive force claims with prejudice. Having now ruled on all of Plaintiff's claims, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk to enter judgment and close this case. Additionally, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motions seeking to have the dash cam video/audio transcribed (ECF Nos. 218 & 223 ) for the reasons explained in Footnote Ten.IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge R Bryan Harwell on 03/13/2019. (dsto, )
|
|
Filing
227
ORDER finding as moot 175 Motion to Stay; finding as moot 183 Motion For Petition Seeking Mandamus Order; finding as moot 192 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 01/29/2019.(dsto, )
|
|
Filing
184
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court ADOPTS IN PART AND AS MODIFIED the Magistrate Judge's R&R (ECF No. 172 ) regarding Plaintiff's § 1983 claims for unlawful seizure and civil conspiracy, GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 140 ) as to these claims, and DISMISSES these claims without prejudice pursuant to Heck. The Court declines to adopt the R&R as to Plaintiff's excessive force claims, and hereby RECOMMITS th is matter to the Magistrate Judge for further pretrial handling. Defendants shall have thirty (30) days to submit any supplemental motion for summary judgment (including additional evidence and briefing) in support of summary judgment on Plaintiff� 39;s excessive force claims against Stewart and Strickland. To clarify, Plaintiffs only remaining claims are his excessive force claims and the only remaining defendants are Defendants Stewart and Strickland. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 09/24/2018. (dsto, )
|
|
Filing
152
ORDER denying 120 Motion for Reconsideration; denying 130 Motion for Default Judgment; granting 144 Motion to Stay; and granting 145 Plaintiff's Rule 56D Motion to the extent Plaintiff requests additional time to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff should receive the dashcam video within ten days of the date of this order, and thereafter will have thirty days to file his response. In other words, Plaintiff has forty days from the date of this order to file a response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 140 ). If Defendants are unable to produce it because it is not within their possession, custody, or control as defined in the case law interpreting Rule 34(a)(1), Defendants must, within the same time frame, file an affidavit explaining why the dash cam video is not within their possession, custody, or control and detailing the efforts made in attempting to regain possession of this video from the federal pro secutor. Although the court declines to award sanctions against Defendants at this time, it reserves the right to readdress the issue of sanctions under Rule 37 at a later time if necessary. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 01/31/2018.(dsto) (Main Document 152 replaced on 1/31/2018 to delete blank page) (dsto)
|
|
Filing
149
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 130 ) be denied at this time. Objections to R&R due by 2/13/2018. 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 Thomas E Rogers, III on 01/30/2018. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to File Objections)(dsto, ) Modified on 1/31/2018 to terminate Report and Recommendation. (dsto)
|
|
Filing
115
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 63 Motion to Compel. Defendants are directed to provide an affidavit or other sworn statement attesting to the veracity of their supplemental discovery responses as well as responses to requests for production six, eight, twenty, and twenty two, as directed above, within ten days of the date of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 02/28/2017.(dsto, )
|
|
Filing
102
ORDER finding as moot 46 Motion to Compel; finding as moot 69 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 75 Motion for Reconsideration ;finding as moot 77 Motion to Stay; finding as moot 91 Motion for Extension of T ime to File Response/Reply ; granting 93 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Defendants are directed to file a sur-reply to Plaintiff's reply (Document # 89 ) within ten days from the date of this order.Within that sur-reply , Defendants are directed to notify the court of the status of Plaintiff's state criminal charges arising from the arrest on March 13, 2015. Ruling on Plaintiff's second Motion to Compel (Document # 63 )is held in abeyance pending further briefing. An amended schedulingorder will be entered upon resolution of the motion to compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 01/27/2017.(dsto, )
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court overrules Plaintiff's objection and adopts and incorporates the R & R (ECF No. 11 ) by reference. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant Townsend is DISMISSED from this action without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 07/18/2016. (dsto, )
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court finds no clear error and therefore adopts and incorporates by reference the R & R (ECF No. 40 ) of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion for default judgment (ECF No. 25 ). Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 06/27/2016. (dsto, )
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 35 Motion for Discovery as set forth; denying 27 Motion Requesting Disclosure Under the Freedom of Information Act; granting 15 & 36 Motions to Amend/Correct. Plaintiff mu st file his amended complaint as well as the requisite service documents within ten days of the date of this order. If Plaintiff fails to do so, the original complaint will remain in place. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 04/29/2016.(dsto, )
|
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.
