Dennis W. Shedd

How Judge Shedd rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Shedd no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

Court
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
Position
district
Status
Elevated to a higher court
Served
1990–2002
Appointed by
George H. W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
1990-10-30
Education
Wofford College, B.A., 1975; University of South Carolina School of Law, J.D., 1978; Georgetown University Law Center, LL.M., 1980
Signed orders read
19

How Judge Shedd decides

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

What persuades

He entered summary judgment when the nonmoving party relied on a conclusory administrative finding rather than evidence establishing a genuine factual dispute.

“Such findings, standing alone, are not enough to salvage [the plaintiffs] claim.”

He preserved a claim against a limitations defense by applying the governing time-computation rule to a deadline that fell on a weekend.

“plaintiffs commencement of this action was timely as a matter of law under the applicable statutes of limitation as computed under Rule 6(a) of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.”

Procedural preferences

He regarded summary judgment as an ordinary mechanism for avoiding a trial when no factfinding remained useful.

“Summary judgment is not ‘a disfavored procedural shortcut, but rather [it is] an integral part of the Federal Rules as a whole, which are designed “to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action.”’”

Cautions

He protected confidential health information in discovery where its significance depended on a statutorily privileged medical status.

“Because the Court finds that information in defendant’s possession relating to the identity of the Donor is privileged, the Court shall order that defendant is protected from disclosing such information”

Signed rulings

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

Pritchett v. Lanier
· 1991-05-31
Summary judgment (plaintiff Robert Pritchett) Granted

“partial summary judgment is granted in favor of plaintiff Robert Pritchett on the question of probable cause.”

Summary judgment (plaintiffs Ben Pritchett and Marietta Garage, Inc.) Granted

“Partial summary judgment is granted in favor of the plaintiffs Ben Pritchett and Marietta Garage, Inc.”

Summary judgment (defendants Lanier and Kimbrell) Granted

“Defendants Lanier and Kimbrell are granted summary judgment on the cause of action against them in their individual capacities.”

Summary judgment (defendant Alford) Denied

“defendant Alford’s motion for summary judgment on the defense of qualified immunity is denied.”

Sverdrup Corp. v. WHC Constructors, Inc.
· 1992-03-17
Motion to confirm arbitration award (plaintiff) Denied

“plaintiffs Motion For Entry Of Arbitration Award As A Final Judgment And Rule 54(b) Certification As Final Judgment be DENIED”

Doe v. American National Red Cross
· 1992-03-31
Motion for protective order (defendant) Granted

“defendant’s Motion For A Protective Order be GRANTED and that plaintiff’s Motion To Compel be DENIED.”

Motions to compel (plaintiff) Denied
White v. Roche Biomedical Laboratories, Inc.
· 1992-12-01
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“defendant’s motion for summary judgment be GRANTED and that judgment be ENTERED accordingly.”

Cianbro Corp. v. Jeffcoat and Martin
· 1992-10-08
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“defendants’ motions for summary judgment be GRANTED, Cianbro’s motion for summary judgment be DENIED, and judgment be ENTERED accordingly.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff Cianbro Corporation) Denied
Creech v. N.D.T. Industries, Inc.
· 1993-03-05
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as to defendant’s tenth affirmative defense be GRANTED and that defendant’s motion for summary judgment be DENIED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied
Notaro v. Evatt
· 1993-09-30
Summary judgment (respondents) Granted

“respondents’ motion for summary judgment be GRANTED.”

Harris v. Palmetto Tile, Inc.
· 1993-10-14
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ Motion For Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs Title VII cause of action.”

Bailey v. South Carolina Department of Social Services
· 1993-10-19
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“defendant’s motion for summary judgment be GRANTED.”

Motion to withdraw as counsel (plaintiff's counsel) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiff's counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel is MOOT.”

Colonial Life & Accident Insurance v. American Family Life Assurance Co.
· 1994-03-16
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment be GRANTED as to its first cause of action, and as to defendant’s first, second, fourth, and fifth counterclaims.”

Rouse v. Nielson
· 1994-03-18
Motion to alter or amend judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“After carefully reviewing the record and the controlling legal authorities, the Court concludes, for the reasons set forth below, that the motion should be denied.”

Taylor v. Cummins Atlantic, Inc.
· 1994-03-01
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“defendant’s motion for summary judgment be GRANTED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The five sampled historical matters included habeas, civil-rights, and asbestos-product-liability cases, but their entry streams were empty; no duration or merits statistic is reported from them.

A historical record

Judge Shedd no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.