Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Scott v. Ray

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division

June 26, 2018

BERNARD SCOTT, Plaintiff,
v.
PATRICIA RAY, ALLISON DAYS, ANGELA SUMPTER, AND CPL. SHANNON, Defendants.

          ORDER

          Thomas E. Rogers, III United States Magistrate Judge

         Presently before the court is Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery. (ECF #31). On April 26, 2018, Defendants filed a response in opposition to the motion. (ECF #32).

         In this motion, Plaintiff moves to have an order “compelling the Defendants to produce for inspection and copying the documents requested on 2-23-18 and 2-28-18.” (ECF #31).

         Defendants filed a response in opposition to the Motion to Compel stating that the following documents have been provided to the Plaintiff: Bates Stamped-Handwritten Grievances 2000-2013, Kiosk Grievances 1000-1090, and Inmate Handbook 4000-4016. Each Request to produce and Defendants response will be discussed below.

1st Request to Produce
3: Any and all documents that classification has on the plaintiff.
Answer: The Darlington County Detention Center safety and security policies prohibit disclosure of the requested information which may compromise the security of employees, contractors, and residents of the DCDC facility.

         In the response in opposition, Defendants assert that access to Plaintiff's classification file at the DCDC is restricted by the detention center. Defendants assert that certain portions of Plaintiff's classification file may be reviewed at the facility upon request through the detention center's kiosk/grievance system.

         Ruling:

         The Motion to Compel with respect to this request is granted to the extent that Defendants are to provide the “certain portions” of Plaintiff's classification file that is referenced in their response which they assert “may be reviewed at the facility” to the Plaintiff within fifteen days of the date of this order.

4. The incident reports from all officers written about the plaintiff. Especially ones by Sgt. Sumpter.
Answer: These records are protected from disclosures pursuant to Darlington County Detention Center Safety Policies as disclosures would cause an undue risk of harm to the employees, contractors and residents of [D]CDC facility.

         Ruling:

         The Motion to Compel with respect to this request is granted to the extent Defendants are to provide the incident reports to the Plaintiff within fifteen days or provide to the court for review by affidavit or other appropriate evidence detailing the reasons why these reports are protected and would be an “undue risk of harm.”

5. The rules and policies on housing sex offenders.
Answer: These records are protected from disclosure pursuant to South Carolina Department of Corrections Safety policies as disclosure would cause an undue risk of harm to the employees, contractors and residents of SCDC facilities.

         Ruling:

         The Motion to Compel with respect to this request is granted to the extent Defendants are to provide the rules and policies on housing sex offenders to the Plaintiff within fifteen days or provide to the court for review by affidavit or other appropriate evidence detailing the reasons why ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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