Cases 1 - 10 of 3,149
Scott v. Perez-Lugo et al
as 3:2024cv00509
Plaintiff:
Daontae T. Scott
Defendant:
E. Perez-Lugo, Christina Crews, R. Bassa and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wingfield v. Clegg et al
as 1:2024cv02220
Plaintiff:
Timothy Bernard Wingfield
Defendant:
Thomas Scott Clegg, Jeffrey Mann and Melody Maddox
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SCOTT v. WEEKS
as 3:2024cv00218
Plaintiff:
JOHN WILLIAM SCOTT
Defendant:
NOLAN WEEKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Woods v. Wiza
as 1:2024cv02180
Petitioner:
Fabian Woods, Jr.
Respondent:
Sgt. Scott Wiza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WOODS v. WIZA
as 4:2024cv00071
Petitioner:
FABIAN WOODS, JR
Respondent:
Warden SCOTT WIZA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SCOTT v. BOBBITT
as 4:2024cv00068
Petitioner:
DEMETRICE SCOTT
Respondent:
Warden TREVONZA BOBBITT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Simpkins v. Wissinger et al
as 5:2024cv00243
Plaintiff:
Leonardo Simpkins
Defendant:
FNU Wissinger, FNU McCatherian, Edward Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
David v. Hydrick et al
as 1:2024cv02003
Plaintiff:
Deonta David
Defendant:
Judge Stacey K. Hydrick, P.D. Scott W. DePlonty, Judge Courtney L. Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Calisi v. Volusia County Department of Corrections et al
as 6:2024cv00839
Plaintiff:
Dillon James Calisi
Defendant:
Volusia County Department of Corrections, Mark A. Flowers, Scott DeEsposito and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Derrick James v. The Geo Group, Inc., et al
as 24-11458
Plaintiff:
DERRICK GREGORY JAMES
Defendant:
THE GEO GROUP, INC., ASSISTANT WARDEN, UXAVIER BROOMSFIELD and others
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.
