Cases 71 - 80 of 1,302
SMITH v. BEASLEY
as 7:2023cv00061
Plaintiff:
ROY MANDELL SMITH
Defendant:
Lt AARON KIRK, Supervisor KEVIN CONNOLLY, NED M MIKULA and others
Respondent:
Warden JACOB BEASLEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Adams v. F.D.O.C. et al
as 3:2023cv00502
Plaintiff:
Lee Frank Adams
Defendant:
F.D.O.C., Florida State Prison Administration, G. Bennott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00285
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Warner v. Seminole County et al
as 6:2023cv00787
Plaintiff:
Jamie C. Warner
Defendant:
Seminole County, Dennis Lemma, City of Sanford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Coast v. Adams et al
as 6:2023cv00029
Plaintiff:
Jerome Coast, Jr.
Defendant:
Brian Adams, Michael Hartmeyer, Deputy Warden Cox and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adams v. Turman et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2023cv00261
Plaintiff:
Patrick Adams
Defendant:
Blake Turman, Thomas Hugghins and Vikki Boyett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adams v. Turman et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2023cv00255
Plaintiff:
James Adams
Defendant:
Blake Turman, Thomas Hugghins and Vikki Boyett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adams v. Tony
as 0:2023cv60745
Plaintiff:
Keyon Quinton Adams
Defendant:
Gregory Tony
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State Prisoner Civil Rights
Allen v. Adams
as 1:2023cv01731
Petitioner:
Jerome Allen
Respondent:
Robert Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Adams v. Bailey et al
as 3:2023cv00431
Plaintiff:
Lee Frank Adams
Defendant:
C. Bailey, Donald Davis and Mark Inch
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.
