Marshall v. Georgetown Memorial Hospital

D. South Carolina

Marshall v. Georgetown Memorial Hospital

DecidedFebruary 14, 2022

Docket2:21-cv-02733

StatusUnknown

This text of Marshall v. Georgetown Memorial Hospital (Marshall v. Georgetown Memorial Hospital) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Marshall v. Georgetown Memorial Hospital, (D.S.C. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION

Loretta Sabrina Marshall, ) Civil Action No. 2:21-2733-RMG Individually and on behalf of all others ) similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ) v. ) ) Georgetown Memorial Hospital, ) d/b/a Tidelands Health, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. No. 15) (the “R&R”), recommending that Defendant’s motion to stay litigation and compel arbitration or alternatively, to dismiss, (Dkt. No. 6), be denied. On January 19, 2022, Defendant filed objections to the R&R to which Plaintiff filed a reply. In its objections, Defendant did not dispute the analysis of the Magistrate Judge as it applied to the information and arguments Defendant presented in its original motion. (Dkt. No. 18). Rather, in its objections, Defendant attached new information—specifically the supplemental declaration of Angela Traver—which appears relevant to determining whether Defendant’s motion should be granted. Considering the new information raised in Defendants’ objections, and to afford both Defendant and Plaintiff a full opportunity to dispute all pertinent issues on the merits, the Court declines to adopt as moot the R&R. The Court rerefers this matter to the Magistrate Judge such that full briefing on the issues raised in Defendant’s objections may be obtained and that Defendant’s motion be considered in light of such briefing. See Anderson v. S. Fin. of S.C. Inc., No. 3:21-cv-2264-MGL-PJG, 2021 WL 5403755, at *2 (D.S.C. 2021), Report and Recommendation adopted by 2021 WL 5371476 (D.S.C. Nov. 18, 2021) (“In ruling on a motion to compel arbitration, the court employs the summary judgment standard.”) AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Richard Mark Gergel Richard Mark Gergel United States District Judge February 14, 2022 Charleston, South Carolina

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION

Loretta Sabrina Marshall, ) Civil Action No. 2:21-2733-RMG Individually and on behalf of all others ) similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ) v. ) ) Georgetown Memorial Hospital, ) d/b/a Tidelands Health, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. No. 15) (the “R&R”), recommending that Defendant’s motion to stay litigation and compel arbitration or alternatively, to dismiss, (Dkt. No. 6), be denied. On January 19, 2022, Defendant filed objections to the R&R to which Plaintiff filed a reply. In its objections, Defendant did not dispute the analysis of the Magistrate Judge as it applied to the information and arguments Defendant presented in its original motion. (Dkt. No. 18). Rather, in its objections, Defendant attached new information—specifically the supplemental declaration of Angela Traver—which appears relevant to determining whether Defendant’s motion should be granted. Considering the new information raised in Defendants’ objections, and to afford both Defendant and Plaintiff a full opportunity to dispute all pertinent issues on the merits, the Court declines to adopt as moot the R&R. The Court rerefers this matter to the Magistrate Judge such that full briefing on the issues raised in Defendant’s objections may be obtained and that Defendant’s motion be considered in light of such briefing. See Anderson v. S. Fin. of S.C. Inc., No. 3:21-cv-2264-MGL-PJG, 2021 WL 5403755, at *2 (D.S.C. 2021), Report and Recommendation adopted by 2021 WL 5371476 (D.S.C. Nov. 18, 2021) (“In ruling on a motion to compel arbitration, the court employs the summary judgment standard.”) AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Richard Mark Gergel Richard Mark Gergel United States District Judge February 14, 2022 Charleston, South Carolina

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Marshall v. Georgetown Memorial Hospital, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marshall-v-georgetown-memorial-hospital-scd-2022.