Pyatt v. Wilson et al
| Teddy Pyatt |
| Ralph J Wilson, Sr, Robert E Ward and William Byars |
| 9:2012cv00266 |
| January 27, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Beaufort Office |
| Richland |
| Bristow Marchant |
| David C Norton |
| 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
94
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant; granting in part and denying in part 76 Motion for Summary Judgment. Specifically, Defendants are granted summary judgment on Plaintiffs claims for money damages under both the Constitution and the RLUIPA. However, Defendants motion for summary judgment is denied with respect to Plaintiffs claims for injunctive relief. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 6/16/2014.(cwhi, )
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER adopting 55 Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant denying 46 Motion for Summary Judgment. This matter shall be set for trial at this Courts November 2013 term. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 4/29/13.(hhil, )
|
|
Filing
30
ORDER denying 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; affirming 27 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Honorable David C Norton on 5/1/2012.(eric, )
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER affirming 11 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Honorable David C Norton on 2/29/2012.(eric, )
|
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.
