Stevenson v. Metts et al
| Marlos Stevenson |
| James Metts and Trinity Food Service |
| 8:2010cv01803 |
| July 12, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Anderson/Greenwood Office |
| Lexington |
| Bruce Howe Hendricks |
| Henry M Herlong |
| Prison Condition |
| 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
51
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 49 , DISMISSING this action with prejudice for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with this court's orders. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on February 7, 2011. (ncha, )
|
|
Filing
16
OPINION AND ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 : Considering Stevenson's objections as amendments to his complaint, the court finds that he has sufficiently stated a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Accepting Stevenson& #039;s allegations as true and liberally construing those allegations, the court finds that he has alleged that the Defendants were aware of and disregarded a known risk to his health and safety. Based on the foregoing, the court declines to adopt Magistrate Judge Hendricks' Report and Recommendation. The court remands this matter to the magistrate judge for furtherproceedings. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 8/16/2010. (ncha, ) Modified on 8/16/2010 to edit text (ncha, ).
|
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.
