Tinsley v. South Carolina Department of Probation Parole and Pardon Services et al
| James Tinsley |
| South Carolina Department of Probation Parole and Pardon Services, Nikki Haley, Larry Ray Patton, Jr, David Baxter, Marvin Stevenson, Henry Eldridge, Thomas Hallam and Jerry B Adger |
| 2:2016cv00996 |
| March 30, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Charleston Office |
| Edgefield |
| Mary Gordon Baker |
| Bruce Howe Hendricks |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
66
ORDER adopting 63 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Donald C Coggins, Jr on 3/22/2018.(ssam, )
|
|
Filing
41
OPINION AND ORDER adopting 38 Report and Recommendation to the extent that it is consistent with this order; granting in part and denying in part 29 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying without prejudi ce 34 Motion for Summary Judgment; dismissing as moot 37 Motion to Dismiss or Motion to Stay by David Baxter, John Doe, Henry Eldridge, Nikki Haley, Thomas Hallam, Larry Ray Patton, Jr, South Carolina Department of Probation Parole and Pardon Services, Marvin Stevenson. This case is remanded to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 6/5/2017.(ssam, )
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
