Weaver et al v. Dillon Department of Social Services et al

Filing 63

ORDER: Plaintiffs are to file any supplemental materials in support of the Motion to Remand no later than September 26, 2014. Defendants' responses to Plaintiff's Motion to Remand and any supplement to that Motion mu st be filed and served no later than October 10, 2014. Plaintiff's Motion for Court Electronic Service, ECF No. 56 , is denied in part. Plaintiff's Motion for the Court to Comply with the "American Rule," ECF No. 58 , is hereby denied without prejudice as premature. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 9/9/2014.(mcot, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
) C/A No. 4:14-2698-RBH-KDW
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
ORDER
vs.
)
)
Dillon Department of Social Services;
)
Jackie Rowland;
)
Karen English;
)
Pansy Page McElveen;
)
Dillon Internal Medicine Associates P.A.;
)
James P. Wallace, M.D.;
)
Felicia Gainey;
)
Harriet Shealey;
)
Cottonwood Villa Assisted Living Facility, Inc.;
)
Dillon County Sheriff’s Office;
)
Deputy Johnnie May Smith;
)
Deputy Chaddie Hayes;
)
Deputy Linda Maimquist;
)
Dillon County Emergency Medical Services;
)
Florence Visiting Nurses Services, Inc.;
)
John D. McInnis;
)
John Does 1-10, and
Doe Partnerships, Corporations and/or other Entities )
)
1-10,
)
Defendants.
_______________________________________
Beatrice E. Weaver, and
Gary Weaver,

In Response to Plaintiff’s Letter Concerning “Administrative Matters” (ECF No. 60):
The court acknowledges receipt of a letter regarding “Administrative Matters” from pro
se Plaintiff Gary Weaver dated September 4, 2014 (ECF No. 60), in which, among other things,
Weaver indicates he had not received any documents containing docket numbers (ECF Nos.) 4151 or any with docket numbers past 52. Weaver requests that the court provide him with an
updated copy of an ECF Docket Listing as well as a copy of “any such documents [he] should
have.” ECF No. 60.

The Clerk of Court is to send an updated docket sheet to Plaintiffs with this Order;
however, Plaintiffs are advised that no further copies of docket sheets will be provided.
However, Plaintiffs are reminded they may obtain copies from the Office of the Clerk of Court
for a nominal charge. The court notes that, although not every entry into ECF represents a
document that is provided to the parties, the Clerk of Court has mailed to Plaintiffs all documents
reflected on the docket sheet, other than those documents received from Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are
reminded of their duty to update their mailing address(es) with the court.
Regarding Plaintiff’s Pending Motion to Remand (ECF No. 18):
Updating the Text Order initially entered on August 11, 2014, ECF No. 49, (regarding
Plaintiff’s pending Motion to Remand, ECF No. 18), the Clerk of Court is instructed to mail a
copy of the Notice of Removal (ECF No. 1) to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are to file any supplemental
materials in support of the Motion to Remand no later than September 26, 2014. Defendants'
responses to Plaintiff's Motion to Remand and any supplement to that Motion must be filed and
served no later than October 10, 2014.
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Court Electronic Service (ECF No. 56):
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Court Electronic Service, ECF No. 56, is denied in part. As pro se
litigants, Plaintiffs will not be permitted to submit documents for filing electronically. Plaintiffs’
Motion does not persuade the court otherwise. However, the court again reminds Plaintiffs to
review page two of the court's Order dated July 10, 2014, ECF No. 16, which provides detailed
information regarding service. Plaintiffs are not excused from service requirements; however,
once counsel have appeared for the other parties, Plaintiff's filing matters with the Clerk of Court
by mail effects proper service upon such parties. In other words, Plaintiffs are not required to

2

serve such parties individually by mail or otherwise if they have filed the document with the
Clerk of Court. See also ECF No. 48.
Plaintiff’s Motion for the Court to Comply with the Directive of the U.S. Supreme Court to
Apply “The American Rule” for the Allocation of Attorney Fees and Costs (ECF No. 58):
Plaintiff’s Motion for the Court to Comply with the “American Rule,” ECF No. 58, is
hereby denied without prejudice as premature as no specific request for attorneys’ fees or costs
currently is under the court’s consideration.
The Clerk of Court is instructed to mail this Order and its attachments (current docket
sheet and ECF No. 1) to Plaintiffs via both certified and regular mail.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

September 9, 2014
Florence, South Carolina

Kaymani D. West
United States Magistrate Judge

3