Williams v. Davenport
Plaintiff: Rackim Lavan Williams
Defendant: Clifton Davenport
Case Number: 8:2014cv04369
Filed: November 12, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Anderson/Greenwood Office
County: Greenville
Presiding Judge: Jacquelyn D Austin
Presiding Judge: Timothy M Cain
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
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
December 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 66 ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 62 Report and Recommendation. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Defendants 48 motion for summary judgment is DENIED as moot. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 12/16/2015. (gpre, )
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: Williams v. Davenport
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rackim Lavan Williams
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: Clifton Davenport
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?