James v. Cartledge et al
Petitioner: Anthony Glenn James
Respondent: Leroy Cartledge
Case Number: 1:2015cv03112
Filed: August 7, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Aiken Office
County: McCormick
Presiding Judge: Timothy M Cain
Presiding Judge: Shiva V Hodges
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 4, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 19 OPINION AND ORDER adopting 16 Report and Recommendation. Respondent's 9 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and the petition is denied with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 2/4/2016. (mwal)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: James v. Cartledge et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Anthony Glenn James
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Leroy Cartledge
Represented By: Donald John Zelenka
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 [ Unicourt | 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.


Why Is My Information Online?