Dickerson v. South Carolina, The State of et al

Filing 15

JUDGMENT dismissing the action without prejudice. (lbak)

Download PDF
AO 450 (SCD 04/2010) Judgment in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District of South Carolina Ismail Dickerson, Plaintiff v. South Carolina, The State of for the actions of the Al Cannon Detention Center and Officers; Charleston, County of for the actions of the Al Cannon Detention Center and Officers; Sheriff Al Cannon for the actions of the Al Cannon Detention Center and Officers; Al Cannon Detention Center; North Charleston, City of Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-03279-TLW JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION The court has ordered that (check one): ’ the plaintiff (name) recover from the defendant (name) the amount of which includes prejudgment interest at the rate of %, plus postjudgment interest at the rate of costs. dollars ($ ), %, along with O The plaintiff, Ismail Dickerson, shall take nothing of the defendants, South Carolina, The State of for the actions of the Al Cannon Detention Center and Officers; Charleston, County of for the actions of the Al Cannon Detention Center and Officers; Sheriff Al Cannon for the actions of the Al Cannon Detention Center and Officers; Al Cannon Detention Center; North Charleston, City of, and this action is dismissed without prejudice. This action was (check one): ’ tried by a jury, the Honorable ’ tried by the Honorable presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict. presiding, without a jury and the above decision was reached. O decided by the Honorable Terry L. Wooten, Chief United States District Judge, presiding, accepting the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable Shiva V. Hodges, United States Magistrate Judge, which recommended dismissing the complaint without prejudice. Date: January 22, 2019 ROBIN L. BLUME, CLERK OF COURT s/L. Baker Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

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?