Stuckey v. Bragg
Petitioner: David Stuckey
Respondent: Travis Bragg
Case Number: 5:2017cv01573
Filed: June 15, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Orangeburg Office
County: Marlboro
Presiding Judge: Kaymani D West
Presiding Judge: Henry M Herlong
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
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
August 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 21 OPINION AND ORDER: The court adopts Magistrate Judge West's 15 Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED that the Petition is dismissed with prejudice because the deficiencies evident in the pleading cannot be corrected with amendment. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 8/24/2017. (prou, )
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: Stuckey v. Bragg
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: David Stuckey
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: Travis Bragg
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?