Bruce Howe Hendricks

How Judge Hendricks rules, drawn from 5 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
Position
district
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
2014-06-05
Education
College of Charleston (B.S. 1983); University of South Carolina School of Law (J.D. 1990)
Signed orders read
5

How Judge Hendricks decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Enforces South Carolina's Door Closing Statute against non-resident plaintiffs who have an alternate forum, granting summary judgment where no countervailing federal interest exists.

“For the foregoing reasons, the court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 24). The case is hereby dismissed without prejudice.”

Procedural preferences

At the pleading stage, construes the facts for the plaintiff and denies a motion to dismiss where a limitations or standing defense does not clearly appear on the face of the complaint.

“the defendants' motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 66, 67, 68, 69) and motion to stay the action pending a ruling on the motions to dismiss (ECF No. 73) are denied.”

Cautions

Reads state wage-protection statutes broadly in the worker's favor at the pleading stage, declining to follow out-of-state authority to the contrary.

“it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 117) is DENIED.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Boisvert v. Techtronic Industries North America, Inc.
· 2014-09-29
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 24). The case is hereby dismissed without prejudice.”

Williams v. National Union Fire Insurance
· 2015-03-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the defendants' motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 66, 67, 68, 69) and motion to stay the action pending a ruling on the motions to dismiss (ECF No. 73) are denied.”

Motions to stay (defendant) Denied
Cox v. Duke Energy, Inc.
· 2016-03-31
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motions for summary judgment.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. McLeod Health, Inc.
· 2017-09-21
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court adopts the Report and grants summary judgment in Defendant's favor.”

Degidio v. Crazy Horse Saloon & Restaurant, Inc.
· 2016-06-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 117) is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 379 days (N = 7).

The sampled caseload includes substantial federal civil-enforcement and False Claims Act work, criminal matters, federal habeas and post-conviction proceedings, contract and employment disputes, civil-rights cases, and miscellaneous subpoena or discovery matters. Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers III handled the referral underlying the McLeod Health summary-judgment ruling.

Draft for Judge Hendricks with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hendricks, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Hendricks's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace