McCormick v. Kershaw County Sheriff's Office

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION Lamitthia McCormick; D’Mario K. ) C/A No. 3:19-2578-MGL-PJG Anderson; Loretta McCormick, individually ) and as a parent and legal guardian of D.K, a ) minor; ) ) ORDER Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) Kershaw County Sheriff’s Office; Lee Doan, ) Sheriff of Kershaw County; Deputy David ) Jordan; Deputy Chris Boykin; 911 Operator ) Brenda Johnson; Responding Unit 202, aka ) John Doe, ) ) Defendants. ) ) The plaintiffs, who are represented by counsel, filed this civil action against the named defendants. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on June 25, 2021, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 38.) As of the date of this order, the plaintiffs have failed to respond to the defendants’ motion in accordance with Local Civil Rule 7.06 (D.S.C.).

As such, it appears to the court that they do not oppose this motion and wish to abandon this action.

Based on the foregoing, it is ORDERED that the plaintiffs shall advise the court as to whether they wish to continue with this case within seven (7) days from the date of this order. The plaintiffs are further advised that if they fail to respond, this action may be decided on the record presented in support of the defendants’ motion, see Local Civil Rule 7.06 (D.S.C.), or may 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 further ORDERED that if the plaintiffs intend to seek leave for an extension in which to file a response in opposition to the pending motion for summary judgment, they must establish the requisite standards for such an untimely filing in accordance with the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules of this court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

July 13, 2021 Paige J. Ae Columbia, South Carolina UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Page 2 of 2