Cases 1 - 10 of 30
Steed v. Hobgood et al
as 5:2024ct03148
Plaintiff:
Byron Steed and Byron Lynn Steed
Defendant:
Sgt. Hobgood, Ashton R. Reams and Sgt. Kinard
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cromartie v. Reams et al
as 5:2024ct03098
Plaintiff:
Christopher D. Cromartie, Jr.
Defendant:
Ashston Reams, Susan Addams, Marcus Houis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walters v. Hawkins et al
as 5:2023ct03207
Plaintiff:
Travis L. Walters
Defendant:
Shanticia Hawkins, Unit Manager Reams, John Doe Lieutenant and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
REAMS v. USA
as 1:2022cv00459
Petitioner:
CORRY RONDEL REAMS
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Reames v. South Carolina, State of
as 3:2022cv01830
Petitioner:
Terry Eugene Reames
Respondent:
South Carolina, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Harris v. Ishee et al
as 5:2022ct03116
Plaintiff:
David Anthony Harris
Defendant:
Todd E. Ishee, Shanticia Hawkins, Byron T. Harris and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pridgen v. Hawkins et al
as 5:2021ct03343
Plaintiff:
Richard Pridgen
Defendant:
Shanticia Hawkins, Shirley Bennett, Kimberly Harris and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Reames v. Greenwood County Detention Center et al
as 4:2021cv02776
Plaintiff:
Jerry Eugene Reames
Defendant:
Greenwood County Detention Center, Southern Health Partners, Captain M. Bollman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Reams v. Andrews
as 2:2020cv00569
Petitioner:
Kenneth Lamont Reams
Respondent:
Justin Andrews
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Rankin Bey v. Adcock et al
as 5:2019ct03329
Defendant:
Karen M. Johnson, Assistant Warden Bennett, C/O Morgan and others
Plaintiff:
Napoleon J. Rankin Bey
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.
