Cases 91 - 100 of 8,849
PRICE v. WALKER et al
as 5:2024cv00127
Defendant:
DANIEL WALKER, JOHN OSBOURNE and FELICIA VICKERS
Plaintiff:
ROBERT STEVEN PRICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DAVIS v. POWERS et al
as 3:2024cv00290
Defendant:
R QUINN, JANE DOE 1, JANE DOE 2 and others
Plaintiff:
LAVAROS DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Terrence Carruth v. John or Jane Doe, et al
as 24-12055
Respondent:
JOHN OR JANE DOE, Suspected to be Detective C.D. Smith, JOHN OR JANE DOE, Suspected to be D.A. Jessica Little, JOHN OR JANE DOE, The Presiding Judge and others
Petitioner:
TERRENCE CARRUTH
Alfredo Bless v. Ricky Dixon, et al
as 24-12099
Defendant:
GANK OR GUNK, AULBERTY, GARCIA and others
Plaintiff:
ALFREDO BLESS
Snell-Jones v. G.D.C. et al
as 6:2024cv00034
Defendant:
D.W. Thomas, Co. Ms. C., Buford and others
Plaintiff:
Zion Snell-Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Travis v. Hamm
as 1:2024cv00206
Respondent:
John Q. Hamm
Petitioner:
Wayne Holleman Travis
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Death Penalty)
NORDQUIST v. POLISHNOWSKI
as 3:2024cv00285
Petitioner:
ERIC JOSEPH NORDQUIST
Respondent:
JOHN POLISHNOWSKI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
MOORE v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 4:2024cv00248
Plaintiff:
JOHN MOORE, III
Defendant:
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and FRANKLIN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
KROFT v. RATHAL et al
as 1:2024cv00099
Defendant:
K M ROSS, RATHAL and JOHN DOE
Plaintiff:
JIMMY LEE KROFT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Howard, Earnest v. Broward County Clerk of Courts et al
as 0:2024cv61048
Defendant:
Broward County Clerk of Courts, Janice Mary John and Terrance Olivier
Plaintiff:
Earnest Howard
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State 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.
