Cases 11 - 18 of 18
TINSLEY v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICES et al
as 3:2018cv13795
Plaintiff:
MAUREEN F. TINSLEY
Defendant:
USPS, JOHN DOES 1-5 and UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
TINSLEY v. PADULA et al
as 3:2017cv11427
Plaintiff:
MAUREEN F. TINSLEY
Defendant:
MICHAEL A. PADULA , US POSTAL SERVICES and JOHN DOES 1 - 5
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1364
TINSLEY v. LAING
as 2:2017cv03824
Plaintiff:
KATRISHA TINSLEY
Defendant:
MATTHEW LAING, SR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
KING v. PADULA et al
as 3:2017cv05443
Plaintiff:
TANYA KING
Defendant:
MICHAEL A. PADULA, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE AT NEPTUNE NEW JERSEY, POSTAL DEPARTMENT and others
Cause Of Action: 39 U.S.C. § 409
BRANTLEY, et al v. SERVICE TRANSPORTATION INC, et al
as 5:2016cv00241
Plaintiff:
MYRON D BRANTLEY and FRANCINE BRANTLEY
Defendant:
SERVICE TRANSPORTATION INC, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and CARLOS G TINSLEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Tinsley et al v. Barney et al
as 3:2014cv00100
Plaintiff:
Richard Tinsley and Tracy L. Tinsley Deckard
Defendant:
John M. Barney, Federal Express Corporation, Fedex Express Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Tinsley v. Government Employees Insurance Company et al
as 3:2011cv00514
Plaintiff:
A. W. Tinsley
Defendant:
Government Employees Insurance Company , Cynthia Eckstein and Justin Eckstein
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Tinsley v. The United States of America, Department of Veterans Affairs et al
as 6:2009cv00055
Plaintiff:
Gracie Tinsley
Defendant:
The United States of America, Department of Veterans Affairs, The United States of America, The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, The United States Department of Health and Human Services, Commonwealth of Virginia, University of Virginia Medical Center and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2651 Medical Care Recovery
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.
