Cases 21 - 30 of 140
DAVIDSON v. MEGROTA et al
as 1:2018cv02062
Plaintiff:
JAMES F. DAVIDSON, JR.
Defendant:
CHARLES MASSARONE, ANUJA MEGROTA and TARSHA JONES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS et al
as 1:2018cv01586
Respondent:
UNITED STATES SOUTHERN DISTRICT, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS and BUREAU OF PRISONS
Petitioner:
JAMES BERNARD JONES, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
JONES v. RUGGE et al
as 1:2018cv01023
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM JONES
Defendant:
C. RUGGE, JACK MATTION and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. KAINE et al
as 1:2018cv00612
Plaintiff:
MACEO JONES
Defendant:
THOMAS KAINE, ANGELA DUNBAR, LE MASTERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES et al v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL et al
as 1:2018cv00524
Petitioner:
MACEO JONES and SALLIE JONES
Respondent:
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, U.S. BUREAU OF PRISONS, ANGELA DUNBAR and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
MCDANIEL v. JONES et al
as 1:2017cv02790
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH MCDANIEL
Defendant:
R. JONES, BOND and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. POLUNSKY DISCIPLINARY & CLASSIFY OFFICIALS et al
as 1:2017cv00887
Plaintiff:
ELVIS WAYNE JONES
Defendant:
POLUNSKY DISCIPLINARY & CLASSIFY OFFICIALS and TEXAS BOARD PARDONS AND PAROLES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. RUSSO et al
as 1:2017cv00211
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ANTHONY JONES
Defendant:
J. RUSSO, SHAW and TERRY O'BRIEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prince Jones v. Muriel Bowser, et al
as 16-7141
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Prince Jones
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Lafayette Dotson, Adonnis Atchinson, Ricky Donaldson and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Muriel Bowser, Phil Mendelson, Kennyan Muduffie and others
JONES v. BOWSER et al
as 1:2016cv02261
Plaintiff:
PRINCE JONES
Defendant:
MURIEL BOWSER, ELBERT GRIFFIN, DOUGLAS CARLSON and others
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.
