Cases 1 - 10 of 105
Eldridge v. Antonelli
as 3:2024cv00069
Plaintiff:
David Lee Eldridge
Defendant:
Bryan M. Antonelli
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cruey v. Southwest Virginia Regional Jail - Tazewell
as 7:2024cv00326
Plaintiff:
David Lee Cruey, II
Defendant:
Southwest Virginia Regional Jail - Tazewell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bowman v. River North Prison
as 7:2023cv00591
Plaintiff:
David Lee Bowman
Defendant:
River North Prison
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bowman v. Keen Mountain
as 7:2023cv00578
Plaintiff:
David Lee Bowman
Defendant:
Keen Mountain
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023ct03245
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Glenn v. Thompson et al
as 4:2023cv03630
Plaintiff:
David Lee Glenn
Defendant:
Unit Manager Thompson, Unit Manager Danford, Unit Manager Tolbert and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Johnson v. Thompson et al
as 4:2023cv03558
Plaintiff:
LaShawn LaMont Johnson, David Lee Glenn, Bernardo Ford, Jr. and others
Defendant:
Unit Manager Danforth, Unit Manager Tolbert, Unit Manager Jackson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Houk v. Alsbrook et al
as 7:2023cv00166
Plaintiff:
David Lee Houk, Jr.
Defendant:
Rick Alsbrook and Randy Mullins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Moore v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 2:2022cv00208
Petitioner:
David Lee Moore
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Virginia and Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. State of North Carolina et al
as 5:2022ct03138
Plaintiff:
David Lee Smith
Defendant:
State of North Carolina, Lexis Publishing, Nancy S. Nash and others
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.
