Tilley v. Walton
| BRADLEY TILLEY |
| SCOTT WALTON, Sheriff or Rogers County, in his official capacity |
| 26-5100 |
| July 21, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit |
| Prison Condition |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 21, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 1 [11300674] Civil case docketed. Preliminary record filed. DATE RECEIVED: 07/21/2026. Docketing statement, transcript order form, and notice of appearance due 08/04/2026 for Bradley Tilley. Notice of appearance due on 08/04/2026 for Scott Walton. [26-5100] [Entered: 07/21/2026 10:30 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Tilley v. Walton | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: BRADLEY TILLEY | |
| Represented By: | Clint James |
| Represented By: | Andrew Michael-Don Casey |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: SCOTT WALTON, Sheriff or Rogers County, in his official capacity | |
| Represented By: | Thomas A. LeBlanc |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Blake Foshee |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.