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.

Brockington v. South Carolina Department of Social Services

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

January 30, 2019

CLARA LEWIS BROCKINGTON, Plaintiff,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES and REESE PALMER, Defendant.

          ORDER

          THOMAS E. ROGERS, III UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

          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.

         II. MOTION FOR SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM

         In Plaintiff's motion docketed as “Motion for Settlement of Claim, ” Plaintiff seeks the following relief:

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, etc.

Motion for Settlement of Claim p. 2.

         Plaintiff 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.

         III. MOTION TO COMPEL

         In 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.[1]

         IV. MOTION FOR ...


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.