Seich v. Cartledge
Petitioner: William Charles Seich
Respondent: Larry Cartledge
Case Number: 5:2016cv02464
Filed: July 6, 2016
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Orangeburg Office
County: Spartanburg
Presiding Judge: Patrick Michael Duffy
Presiding Judge: Kaymani D West
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2254
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
March 29, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER RULING ON 30 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The Court adopts the R & R, grants Cartledge's summary judgment motion, denies Seich's rule to show cause motion, and dismisses Seichs § 2254 petition with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Patrick Michael Duffy on 03/29/2017. (egra, )
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: Seich v. Cartledge
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: William Charles Seich
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 ]
Respondent: Larry Cartledge
Represented By: Donald John Zelenka
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?