Gilchrist v. Edwardson et al

Filing 27

ORDER directing Clerk not to authorize service. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 04/09/2014. (dsto, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Alfred Gilchrist, ) C/A No. 4:13-3512-MGL-TER ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ORDER ) Willie B. Edwardson, Detective of Marion County) Sheriff Dept.; ) James Lee; ) Neal Ross, Marion County Sheriffs, and ) Mark K. Richardson, Sheriff of Marion County, ) all in their official capacities, and ) State of South Carolina, ) ) Defendants. ) ________________________________________ This is a civil action filed by a state prisoner appearing in forma pauperis. Under Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) of the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, pretrial proceedings in this action have been referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge. TO THE CLERK OF COURT: The Clerk of Court shall list the parties on the docket as they are listed in the caption of this Order. Per the Amended Complaint, the Clerk shall add “all in their official capacities” under the original Defendants’ names and shall add “State of South Carolina” as a new Defendant. In order to preserve issues raised in this case and give liberal construction to the pleadings, the Clerk of Court is directed to append the Complaint (ECF No. 1) as an attachment to the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 22). This case is subject to summary dismissal based on an initial screening of the Amended Complaint conducted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915 and/or 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Therefore, the Clerk of Court shall not issue any summonses nor shall the Clerk of Court forward this matter to the United States Marshal for service of process at this time. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Thomas E. Rogers, III Thomas E. Rogers, III United States Magistrate Judge April 9, 2014 Florence, South Carolina

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?