Cases 11 - 20 of 37
King et al v. Perry et al
as 5:2017ct03043
Plaintiff:
Timothy Royal King, Michael Blakney, Derick White and others
Defendant:
Frank L. Perry, W. David Guice, Cynthia Thornton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cohen v. Tinsley et al
as 1:2016cv03169
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Cohen
Defendant:
John Tinsley and Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tinsley v. Wexford Health Source
as 1:2016cv02526
Plaintiff:
Wendell V. Tinsley
Defendant:
Wexford Health Source
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tinsley v. USA
as 1:2016cv00778
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Kevin Tinsley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Tinsley v. South Carolina Department of Probation Parole and Pardon Services et al
as 2:2016cv00996
Plaintiff:
James Tinsley
Defendant:
South Carolina Department of Probation Parole and Pardon Services, Nikki Haley, Larry Ray Patton, Jr and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tinsley v. South Carolina, State of
as 2:2015cv02744
Petitioner:
James Tinsley
Respondent:
South Carolina, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Tinsley v. Green et al
as 1:2012cv02760
Plaintiff:
Wendell Tinsley
Defendant:
Kathleen S. Green and Robert B. Hanke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tinsley v. USA
as 4:2012cv80489
Petitioner:
Curtis Daryle Tinsley
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
James Tinsley v. Brian Wight
as 12-6629
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES DOUGLAS TINSLEY, a/k/a Jimmy Tinsley, a/k/a Jimmy D. Tinsley, III, a/k/a James D. Tinsley, II, a/k/a James Douglas Tinsley, II
Defendant - Appellee:
BRIAN WIGHT, Detective, SCSO and R. BOGAN, Investigator, I-58, SCSO
Defendant:
CHUCK WRIGHT, Sheriff, SCSO and COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG, being sued in their individual and official capacities
Tinsley v. USA
as 1:2012cv00186
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Michael M. Tinsley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
