United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division
E. ROGERS, III UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this action
arising from her employment with Defendant. Presently before
the court are Plaintiff's Motion for Settlement of Claim
(ECF No. 59), Motion to Compel (ECF No. 63), and Motion for
Extension of Time (ECF No. 75). All pretrial proceedings in
this case were referred to the undersigned pursuant to the
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Local
Rule 73.02(B)(2)(g), DSC.
MOTION FOR SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM
Plaintiff's motion docketed as “Motion for
Settlement of Claim, ” Plaintiff seeks the following
Prose Plaintiff's motion is to dispose of any evidence
that the Defendants are attempting for admission concerning
previous falls, previous injuries, previous jobs, etc., are
not admissible in court and motion is granted by the court.
Prose Plaintiff's motion(s) are that the claim(s)
submitted by the Plaintiff is granted by the court and not
dismissed by the court. Pro se Plaintiff is in agreement to
negotiate claims stated with the Defendants.
Prose Plaintiff's motion is that Reese Palmer remains a
part of this case along with DSS, since he is the party that
hired Plaintiff and terminated Plaintiff and motion is
granted by court.
Prose Plaintiff's motion is that the court grant all
evidence to be admissible to support the injury and continued
disability of the Plaintiff such as medicals, salaries,
injury, Defendants' refusal to pay worker's
compensation, loss of benefits, Job Description and
Acceptance Letter does not state that a test and
certification had to be taken with a passing score was
contingent upon being hired as a Foster Care Case Manager,
Motion for Settlement of Claim p. 2.
has filed no evidence to support these requests, which are
more appropriately raised in either a motion for summary
judgment or in opposition to a motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff also indicates her willingness to “negotiate
claims, ” which she may address with Defendants. As
such, Plaintiff's motion is denied.
MOTION TO COMPEL
Plaintiff's Motion to Compel she argues that she has not
received any response from Defendants to her discovery
requests. Defendants respond by stating that they missed the
deadline to respond due to an internal calendaring error, but
have since submitted responses to Plaintiff's requests.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is moot.
MOTION FOR ...