Tinsley v. Singleton et al
| James D Tinsley, III |
| James Singleton, Greg Reed, David Smith, Steve Pruitt, B A Norton, Phyllis Lombard, Oconee County and John-Jane Does |
| 8:2008cv00532 |
| February 19, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Anderson/Greenwood Office |
| Oconee |
| Sol Blatt |
| Bruce Howe Hendricks |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers |
| Plaintiff |
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
100
ORDER OF SUBSTITUTION: Tiarna Harman is substituted as counsel of record for Plaintiff James D. Tinsley, II in this matter;Order signed by Honorable Sol Blatt, Jr on March 21, 2011. (ncha, )
|
|
Filing
91
ORDER: The Court grants the Plaintiff's motion to reconsider 56 . Specifically, the Court affirms its grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendant on the Plaintiff's Heck claims; however, the Court notes that its grant of summary ju dgment is without prejudice to the Plaintiff's right to bring these claims again should he be successful on his direct appeal. Next, the Court denies summary judgment in favor of either party on the Plaintiff's non-Heck claims. Finally, the Court affirms its grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants with respect to the Plaintiff's access to courts claim; Order signed by Honorable Sol Blatt, Jr on 8/17/2010. (ncha, )
|
|
Filing
54
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 50 Report and Recommendations, that plaintiff's 33 Motion for Summary Judgment is Denied, and defendants' 39 Motion for Summary Judgment is Granted. Signed by Honorable Sol Blatt, Jr on 3/23/09. (kmca)
|
|
Filing
50
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending defendants' 39 MOTION for Summary Judgment, be Granted and plaintiff's 33 MOTION for Summary Judgment, be Denied. More specifically, the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claim should be dismissed without prejudice and plaintiff's Denial of Access claim should be dismissed with prejudice. Objections to R&R due by 2/2/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bruce Howe Hendricks on 1/15/09. (kmca)
|
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.
