Cases 1 - 10 of 24,996
Wilkins v. Jackson
as 0:2024cv03620
Petitioner:
Johnny Ray Wilkins
Respondent:
Shane Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Scarborough v. Early
as 1:2024cv03646
Petitioner:
Sammy Lee Scarborough
Respondent:
Curtis Early
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
White v. USA
as 8:2024cv03617
Petitioner:
Andrew Latroy White
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Dildy v. City of North Charleston et al
as 2:2024cv03612
Plaintiff:
Leangelo Dildy
Defendant:
City of North Charleston, John Doe, Jared Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Green v. Sergeant Seabrook et al
as 8:2024cv03621
Plaintiff:
Jaylyn Green
Defendant:
Sergeant Seabrook, Sergeant Jenkins, LT Dabbs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Mackins v. Kirk et al
as 0:2024cv03619
Plaintiff:
Denyatta Mackins
Defendant:
SA Steven Kirk and Officer Matthew Earls
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Addison v. Armstrong
as 2:2024cv03623
Plaintiff:
Jerome Addison
Defendant:
Julie J. Armstrong
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lisenby v. Streeval
as 5:2024cv03593
Petitioner:
Billy Lee Lisenby, Jr and Malik Al-Shabazz
Respondent:
Warden J.C. Streeval
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Lisenby v. Streeval
as 5:2024cv03594
Petitioner:
Billy Lee Lisenby, Jr and Malik Al-Shabazz
Respondent:
Unit Manager J Streeval
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Washington v. South Carolina Dept. of Corrections et al
as 4:2024cv03591
Plaintiff:
Edward Lee Washington and Edward L.J. Washington
Defendant:
South Carolina Dept. of Corrections, Warden Kenneth Nelson, Bryan Stirling and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
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.
