Pegues v. Kendall

D. South Carolina

Pegues v. Kendall

DecidedJuly 28, 2021

Docket5:21-cv-00763

StatusUnknown

This text of Pegues v. Kendall (Pegues v. Kendall) 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

Pegues v. Kendall, (D.S.C. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

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

William S. Pegues, ) C/A No.: 5:21-763-TMC-KDW ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) Warden Kendall, ) ) Respondent. ) )

William S. Pegues (“Petitioner”) proceeding pro se, filed this action seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent filed a Return and Motion for Summary Judgment on June 10, 2021. ECF Nos. 20, 21. As Petitioner is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Petitioner of the importance of a motion for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an adequate response by July 15, 2021. ECF No. 23. Petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Respondent’s motion may be granted, thereby ending this case. Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s Roseboro order, Petitioner has not responded to the motion nor has he otherwise communicated with the court. As such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose the motion and wishes to abandon this action. Based on the foregoing, Petitioner is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment by August 16, 2021. Petitioner is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will 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 SO ORDERED.

July 28, 2021 Kaymani D. West Florence, South Carolina United States Magistrate Judge

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

William S. Pegues, ) C/A No.: 5:21-763-TMC-KDW ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) Warden Kendall, ) ) Respondent. ) )

William S. Pegues (“Petitioner”) proceeding pro se, filed this action seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent filed a Return and Motion for Summary Judgment on June 10, 2021. ECF Nos. 20, 21. As Petitioner is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Petitioner of the importance of a motion for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an adequate response by July 15, 2021. ECF No. 23. Petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Respondent’s motion may be granted, thereby ending this case. Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s Roseboro order, Petitioner has not responded to the motion nor has he otherwise communicated with the court. As such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose the motion and wishes to abandon this action. Based on the foregoing, Petitioner is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment by August 16, 2021. Petitioner is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will 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 SO ORDERED.

July 28, 2021 Kaymani D. West Florence, South Carolina United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Pegues v. Kendall, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pegues-v-kendall-scd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack