Eleventh Circuit Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 31 - 40 of 157,316
Scott v. Perez-Lugo et al
as 3:2024cv00509
Plaintiff:
Daontae T. Scott
Defendant:
E. Perez-Lugo, Christina Crews, R. Bassa and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Watson v. Campos
as 3:2024cv00505
Plaintiff:
Tyson Nathaniel Watson
Defendant:
C.A. Campos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wingfield v. Phams
as 1:2024cv02221
Petitioner:
Timothy Bernard Wingfield
Respondent:
Angela Phams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Junco v. Georgia Department of Corrections
as 1:2024cv02219
Plaintiff:
Douglas Junco
Defendant:
Georgia Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wingfield v. Clegg et al
as 1:2024cv02220
Plaintiff:
Timothy Bernard Wingfield
Defendant:
Thomas Scott Clegg, Jeffrey Mann and Melody Maddox
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Ward et al
as 1:2024cv02193
Plaintiff:
William R. Jackson
Defendant:
WARDEN Timothy C. Ward, Kim Patton-Johnson and Stephanie Damiels
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HOUSTON v. MITCHELL et al
as 5:2024cv00154
Plaintiff:
BRADLEY MANDELA HOUSTON
Defendant:
OFFICER MITCHELL and DEPUTY WARDEN LATORSHA JONES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BROOKS v. TOBY et al
as 5:2024cv00155
Plaintiff:
STANLEY BROOKS
Defendant:
WARDEN ANNETTIA TOBY, DEPUTY WARDEN JEREMY FOTSON, DEPUTY WARDEN CALPURNIA WASHINGTON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
WRIGHT III v. ESPOSITO
as 4:2024cv00212
Plaintiff:
ROBERT LEE WRIGHT III
Defendant:
KAREN ESPOSITO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WATSON v. WHITEFIELD
as 4:2024cv00218
Plaintiff:
TYSON N WATSON
Defendant:
HEATHER WHITFIELD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
