Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Haway v. Evans

United States District Court, D. South Carolina

December 19, 2014

Tyler Sebastian Haway, Plaintiff,
v.
Ralph Evans; Rick Clark; Mary Hammond; Drew Sisco; Katherine Vissage; Pickens County Law Enforcement Center Defendants.

ORDER

PAIGE J. GOSSETT, Magistrate Judge.

The plaintiff has filed this action, pro se, seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983. Plaintiff, an inmate with the South Carolina Department of Corrections, alleges violations of his constitutional rights by the named defendants. Defendants Evans, Clark, Sisco, Vissage, and the Pickens County Law Enforcement Center filed a motion for summary judgment on November 10, 2014, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 50.) As the plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison , 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975) on November 12, 2014, advising the plaintiff of the importance of a motion for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an adequate response. (ECF No. 53.) The plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, the defendants' motion may be granted, thereby ending his case against them.

Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court's Roseboro order, the plaintiff has failed to respond to the motion. As such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose the motion and wishes to abandon this action against these defendants.

Based on the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that the plaintiff shall advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with this case against these defendants and to file a response to the defendants' motion for summary judgment within fourteen (14) days from the date of this order. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, the claims against these defendants will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Davis v. Williams , 588 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir. 1978); Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.