Cases 11 - 20 of 120
Evans v. Bryant et al
as 6:2023cv00368
Plaintiff:
Judson Todd Evans
Defendant:
Chris Bryant, Devin Atwood, Turnkey Health and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Hill et al
as 5:2023cv00686
Plaintiff:
Daniel Lee Mitchell
Defendant:
Sara Elizabeth Hill, Catina R Drywater, Rachel Marie Dallis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bechtol v. Carter County et al
as 6:2023cv00254
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Edward Bechtol
Defendant:
Carter County, Chris Bryant, Harvey Burkhart and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Parris et al
as 4:2023cv00017
Plaintiff:
Daniel Lee Mitchell
Defendant:
John Everett Parris, Rachel Marie Dallis, Jeffery Bryant Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Willis v. Bryant
as 6:2022cv00140
Petitioner:
Jamontra D. Willis
Respondent:
Chris Bryant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Davis v. Stitt et al
as 5:2022cv00302
Plaintiff:
Ezekiel Davis
Defendant:
Kevin Stitt, Amber Martin, Mark Bowen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
It v. Tulsa Police Department et al
as 4:2022cv00042
Plaintiff:
Anthony K It, Anthony Nkefiah and Anthony Bryant
Defendant:
Tulsa Police Department and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Labansat v. Bryant
as 6:2021cv00360
Petitioner:
Richard Labansat
Respondent:
Carter County, Carter County, OK and Chris Bryant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Davis v. GEO Group Inc et al
as 5:2021cv00577
Defendant:
Wellpath Inc, FNU Smith, Rita Hood and others
Plaintiff:
Ezekiel Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Claudio v. Bates et al
as 5:2021cv00071
Defendant:
J Kevin Stitt, Mark Knutson, FNU Bowen and others
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Anibal Claudio
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
