Wilson v. Cloyd et al

Filing 56

ORDER - Terminating as moot: 49 Motion to Amend/Correct 1 Complaint and 52 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Defendant is directed to file a Waiver of Service with the court within fourteen (14) days of theissuance of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paige J Gossett on 10/19/2015. (gmil)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
Phyllis A. Wilson,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Richland County,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_____________________________________ )

C/A No. 3:15-1391-MGL-PJG

ORDER

This is a civil action filed by a pro se litigant. Under Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.),
pretrial proceedings in this action have been referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge.
By order issued on September 24, 2015 (ECF No. 43), the Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis
granted a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant John A. Cloyd (ECF No. 20) and a Motion to
Dismiss and Substitute Parties filed by Defendant Elizabeth McDonald (ECF No. 24)1. The order
further granted Plaintiff leave to amend the Complaint to name Richland County as the proper
defendant in this case. (ECF No. 43 at 2.) Plaintiff timely submitted an Amended Complaint
naming Richland County as the sole defendant in this action. (ECF No. 50.)
TO THE PARTIES:
Having reviewed the Amended Complaint in accordance with the applicable law, the court
construes it as purporting to assert the following claims against the defendant:
• discrimination based on Plaintiff’s race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq.; and
• discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
(“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621, et seq.
No other claims are being construed as having been raised by Plaintiff in this action.

1

Defendant McDonald’s Motion to Dismiss and Substitute Parties sought the substitution
of Richland County as the sole defendant in this case. (ECF No. 24-1 at 4.)
Page 1 of 3

MOTION TO AMEND:
Plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend the Complaint (ECF No. 49) contemporaneously with the
Amended Complaint (ECF No. 50). Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend (ECF No. 49) is terminated as
moot in light of the previously issued order (ECF No. 43) granting Plaintiff leave to amend the
Complaint.
PAYMENT OF THE FILING FEE:
Plaintiff also filed an unsigned Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying
Fees or Costs (Form AO 240), which has been construed as a motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis in this case.2 (ECF No. 52.) The court has already granted Plaintiff permission to proceed
in this case without prepayment of the filing fee. (ECF No. 8.) Therefore, Plaintiff’s duplicate
motion shall be terminated as moot. (ECF No. 52.)
SERVICE OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT:
Counsel for Richland County filed a reply (ECF No. 45) to the order granting the motion to
substitute Richland County as the proper defendant in this case (ECF No. 43). The reply indicates
that counsel is authorized to accept service of an Amended Complaint naming Richland County.
(ECF No. 45.) Thus, service of the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 50) was accomplished via a
Notice of Electronic Filing generated by the court’s Electronic Filing System to counsel and
Richland County filed an answer to the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 54).
TO DEFENDANT:
While it does not appear that Richland County contests the manner of service in this case,
this defendant is directed to file a Waiver of Service with the court within fourteen (14) days of the
issuance of this order. If no such waiver is received, the court will direct that service of process be
effected by the United States Marshal.
TO PLAINTIFF:
Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, any documents filed subsequent
to the initial pleading must be served on parties. Unless otherwise ordered, service of subsequently
filed documents on a defendant represented by an attorney is made on the attorney. Service on
attorneys who have made an appearance in this court is effected by the court’s Electronic Case Filing
system through a computer generated notice of electronic filing. However, prior to the defendant’s
attorney making an appearance in this court, Plaintiff must serve the defendant with any documents
Plaintiff files subsequent to the initial pleading and file a certificate of service that states who was
served, what document was served, and how the document was served.

2

The Motion is dated March 3, 2015. (ECF No. 52 at 2.) Thus, it appears that Plaintiff
resubmitted her originally filed AO 24O to the court with the Amended Complaint.
Page 2 of 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
Paige J. Gossett
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
October 19, 2015
Columbia, South Carolina

Page 3 of 3