Here is the latest on the Jane Doe lawsuits over Horry County Police misconduct

Federal civil cases alleging misconduct by Horry County police and disgraced cop Allen Large will continue after a judge rejected county efforts for summary judgment.

A federal judge issued the order Thursday denying the judgment request by Horry County, Horry County Police, ex-chief Saundra Rhodes and others, according to court records.

In the order, the judge noted that evidence supports claims that Horry County supervisors knew or should have known that Large “posed a constant and dangerous threat to women.”

Summary judgment is used in civil cases when one or both sides say a judge should rule in their favor after there are facts no longer in dispute.

Five women — only known as Jane Does — filed civil suits against the county and the police agency alleging misconduct. Most of the alleged misconduct centered around Large, who was found dead in his home in January 2018.

• In Jane Doe 3’s suit, the victim first reported a domestic violence incident in 1996 and Large investigated. In 1998, the victim’s husband shot her five times in the hand and back, and Large was again assigned to the case. The victim left the area but returned in 2003 and in 2015 reported domestic violence with her new husband. Large investigated and coerced the victim to participate in the catfighting videos, the filing states.

• In Jane Doe 4’s case, the victim said she was addicted to drugs, and in 2014, Large called her on a cellphone, saying he got her number from a shared associate. He visited the victim’s home and committed sexual assault, the suit states. Large continued to contact the victim and demanded she participate in the fighting videos.

The other three lawsuits were previously settled.

By rejecting the summary judgment requests, the cases move one step closer to trial.

Judge Mary Gieger Lewis issued the opinion, and wrote that if presented with the evidence the jury might decide that the county and police supervisors knew Large was engaged in conduct that put citizens at risk.

The judge added there is sufficient evidence to support claims that supervisors were aware, or should have been aware, of Large’s “frequent misconduct.”

As a result, if the evidence can show that Large continued, unchecked actions while as an officer “posed a constant and dangerous threat to women such as Doe-3,” Gieger wrote.

She also rejected a county stance that it was immune from prosecution.