Margaret B. Seymour
How Judge Seymour rules, drawn from 16 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Seymour no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Seymour
Margaret B. Seymour was a judge of the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Seymour received a commission on October 22, 1998. Judge Seymour assumed senior status on January 16, 2013 and retired on August 31, 2022.
How Judge Seymour decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Abbott v. Pastides, Seymour held that a university official’s limited inquiry into discrimination complaints was narrowly drawn to protect students and did not sanction or silence the speakers.
“the inquiry by Wells was a narrowly drawn solution that was necessary to serve USC's compelling interest in protecting students' rights to be free from discrimination based on race, gender, religion, or other attributes”
In Abbott's First Amendment suit, Seymour found the challenge to the university's revised and repealed policies moot after the university documented the changes and stated it would not reinstate the old policies; she declined prospective injunctive relief.
“The court concludes that USC voluntarily ceased the allegedly illegal conduct and the allegations have become moot. The court declines to issue injunctive relief against any future revision to the policies.”
Procedural preferences
In Sill v. AVSX Technologies, LLC, Seymour denied summary judgment on disputed employee status because a jury could find the salespeople were statutory employees despite their contractor agreements.
“The court finds that there is a genuine issue of material fact whether Plaintiffs were statutory employees or independent contractors after November 2013. A reasonable jury could find that Plaintiffs were employees regardless of the contracts that they signed.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 27) and Defendants' second motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 36) are hereby GRANTED ... and the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendants’ second motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 36) are hereby GRANTED. ... the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“Plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 49) is DENIED, and the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant AVSX's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendant AVSX's motion is granted as to any claims prior to November 2013 and is denied as to any claims after November 2013.”
“Plaintiffs' motion in limine is DENIED.”
“Defendant AVSX's motion in limine is DENIED.”
“For the reasons stated, the court denies Plaintiff's motion to remand. ECF No. 10.”
“UHSC's motion to dismiss is rendered moot. ECF No. 7.”
“Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint is granted in part to provide for the identity of Shawn Smith as Defendant John Doe. ECF No. 19.”
“Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 28) is granted.”
“ANPAC's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 33) is denied.”
“The court declines to adopt the Report and Recommendation for the reasons stated herein. The Commissioner's final decision of no disability is REMANDED.”
“The matter should proceed to discovery for the purpose of determining what caused Athena's laboratory staff to misclassify the gene mutation.”
“Respondent's motion for summary judgment (EOF No.18) is granted in part and denied in part.”
“Petitioner's § 2254 petition is denied and dismissed in part, with prejudice, and granted in part.”
“For the reasons set for below, the court grants Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and denies Defendant's motion for summary judgment. The court finds there is no genuine issue of material fact that Defendant violated the terms of its NDPES permit by failing to connect to the regional system.”
“the court grants Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and denies Defendant's motion for summary judgment.”
“the court grants G & P's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 20) and denies SKF's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 26).”
“Because summary judgment has been granted to G & P, G & P's motion in limine, ECF No. 35, is denied as moot.”
“Respondent's motion for summary judgment (Entry 13) is granted and the petition is dismissed with prejudice.”
“the Government's motion for damages and penalties under the FCA (ECF No. 818) is granted. ... The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment under the FCA in the amount of $237,454,195.00, plus interest at the legal rate.”
“The Government's second motion for summary judgment and/or judgment as a matter of law on the Government's equitable claims (ECF No. 823) is denied, without prejudice.”
“Tuomey's motion to require election of remedies is denied, without prejudice.”
“The Government's motion for judgment as a matter of law on Counts IV and V of the second amended complaint (ECF No. 826) is denied, without prejudice.”
“Tuomey's motion for judgment as a matter of law or in the alternative, for a new trial (ECF No. 827) is denied.”
“Defendant Leonhardt's motion to remand, ECF No. 10, is GRANTED. This case is hereby REMANDED to the Lexington County Court of Common Pleas.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 345 days (N = 10).
Counts are illustrative from a capped enumeration, not an authoritative caseload census; no authoritative caseload baseline is loaded on this record.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Seymour was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2022.
| Motions pending more than six months | 1 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2022 | 1 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 1 | 2 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2020 | 5 | 3 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
A historical record
Judge Seymour no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.