Wilson v. Eagelton et al

Filing 58

ORDER mooting in part and granting in part 49 MOTION to Compel . Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges on 12/19/2018. (lbak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Garcia Wilson,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Warden Willie Eagleton, Officer
Lucas, Officer Cotton, Officer Sims,
and Officer Williamson,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 1:18-50-RMG-SVH

ORDER

Garcia Wilson (“Plaintiff”) filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights during his incarceration
at Evans Correctional Institution (“ECI”) in the custody of the South Carolina
Department of Corrections (“SCDC”). Plaintiff asserts claims against ECI
Warden Willie Eagleton (“Eagleton”) and SCDC officers Lucas, Cotton, Sims,
and Williamson (collectively “Defendants”).
This matter comes before the court on Plaintiff’s motion to compel.
[ECF No. 49]. The undersigned held a hearing on the motion on December 19,
2018. [ECF No. 52]. Subsequently, the parties advised the court that all
disputes at issue in the motion to compel are moot save for the two issues
discussed below.
The first remaining discovery dispute is whether Defendants must
produce the file related to the investigation of the stabbing of the prisoner

plaintiff. The stabbing at issue is directly related to Plaintiff’s claim for
failure to protect. Therefore, the court finds that the investigatory file is
relevant and that any privacy or security concerns with its production will be
alleviated by producing the document under the terms of the confidentiality
order.
Defendants have also objected to the production of the investigatory file
related to now-former correctional officer Lucas. Plaintiff alleges Lucas
personally assaulted him and allowed others to assault him by refusing to
lock Plaintiff's cell door. The investigatory file is prepared by SCDC Police
Services, which is an independent investigatory branch of SCDC. Defendants
had concerns about the effect producing these documents might have on
current and future criminal prosecutions. Given Plaintiff’s allegations
regarding Lucas, this investigatory file also is directly relevant to the claims
in Plaintiff’s case. Therefore, SCDC is also directed to produce this file
pursuant to the terms of the confidentiality order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

December 19, 2018
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge

2