Cases 101 - 110 of 190
WILSON v. PADGHAM
as 4:2013cv00167
Plaintiff:
DENVER IVAN WILSON
Defendant:
B PADGHAM, T BOWDEN, R HOSFORD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Melvin Saulsberry, II v. D. Kent, et al
as 13-11087
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MELVIN L. SAULSBERRY, II
Defendant - Appellee:
D. KENT and C. ROBARDS
Sands v. Medlin et al
as 3:2013cv00021
Plaintiff:
Kent Lamond Sands
Defendant:
Jason Medlin, Corrections Corporations of America and Brian Owens
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brush v. Reyes et al
as 6:2013cv00154
Plaintiff:
Stuart Dale Brush
Defendant:
Carlos Reyes, Joseph E. Martin, Jr. and Jonathon Kent
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dexter White v. Wakulla County FL, et al
as 12-16478
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DEXTER WANZEL WHITE
Defendant - Appellee:
WAKULLA COUNTY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, N. SANDERS SAULS, Hon. and others
Smith v. Blount County Correctional Facility et al
as 2:2012cv03995
Plaintiff:
Dakota Bill Smith
Defendant:
Blount County Correctional Facility, Ronnie Mack Kent and Woodard
Miscellaneou:
staff attorney 2
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Crowe v. Kent
as 2:2012cv03689
Plaintiff:
Thomas Doyle Crowe
Defendant:
Ronnie Mac Kent
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brush v. Reyes et al
as 6:2012cv01557
Plaintiff:
Stuart Dale Brush
Defendant:
Carlos Reyes, Joseph Martin, Jr, Jonathon Kent and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HICKS v. TUCKER
as 3:2012cv00473
Petitioner:
TOMMY KENT HICKS
Respondent:
KENNETH TUCKER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barber v. Hale et al
as 2:2012cv02772
Plaintiff:
Donald Joe Barber
Defendant:
Mike Hale, Jefferson County Jail and Brandon Kent Falls
Miscellaneou:
staff attorney
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.
