South Carolina Section 1983 Cases

3 cases in the library

These are the cases in the library that arose in South Carolina or bind courts there. Federal district courts in South Carolina sit in the Fourth Circuit, so published Fourth Circuit decisions and Supreme Court decisions control. State-court decisions are included where they decide a probable-cause or offense-element question that a Section 1983 court will look to.

A case is tagged to a state when it arose there or when it is binding precedent for federal courts there. Circuit decisions are tagged to every state in the circuit. The Section 1983 limitations period in South Carolina is 3 years; see the South Carolina statute of limitations page.

Start with these guides

South Carolina statute of limitations: 3 years The borrowed personal-injury period under S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530(5), when the clock starts, and what to verify.
Statute of Limitations and Tolling in a § 1983 Case Learn when the filing clock starts in a Section 1983 case, how tolling can pause it, and how to avoid losing a viable claim by waiting too long.
How to Research Clearly Established Law in a § 1983 Case Learn how to research clearly established law for qualified immunity, find circuit-specific precedent, and build stronger Section 1983 arguments.
Before You File Anything: Local Rules and Your Judge's Standing Orders The seven questions to answer about your district and your judges before filing a single document in a Section 1983 case, where to find the answers, and a worksheet to keep them.

Cases, newest first

Carter v. Morris

164 F.3d 215 (4th Cir. 1999) · Jan 14, 1999

Officers who burst into a home without warning, pointed guns at occupants' heads, and used excessive physical force during the execution of a search warrant violated the Fourth Amendment, and were not entitled to qualified immunity because the right to be free from excessive force during the execution of a warrant was clearly established.

Roberts v. City of Forest Acres

902 F. Supp. 662 (D.S.C. 1995) · Aug 21, 1995

The court denied summary judgment for the city and officer on excessive force and municipal liability claims where evidence showed an officer used force significantly disproportionate to the threat posed during a traffic stop, and the city had inadequate training and supervision of its officers regarding use of force.

Shaw v. Stroud

13 F.3d 791 (4th Cir. 1994) · Jan 6, 1994

A police supervisor can be held liable under § 1983 for a subordinate's use of excessive force where the supervisor had actual or constructive knowledge of a pervasive pattern of misconduct, was deliberately indifferent to the risk, and there was an affirmative causal link between the supervisor's inaction and the constitutional injury.

Looking for something else? Use the filters on the full case library.

Have corrections or want to suggest a change?