Cases 11 - 20 of 353
King, Jr. v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice et al
as 9:2023cv00075
Plaintiff:
David King, Jr.
Defendant:
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Brian Collier, Kourtney S. Lane and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Grayer v. Martin et al
as 2:2023cv01133
Plaintiff:
Albert Anthony Grayer
Defendant:
Heath Martin, T. Lane, Michael Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adams v. United States of America
as 5:2023cv00338
Plaintiff:
Spence Lane Adams
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
USA v. Lynch
as 23-20089
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Daniel Lane Lynch
Hughes v. Criminal Interdiction Team et al
as 1:2023cv00049
Plaintiff:
Oliver King Hughes
Defendant:
Criminal Interdiction Team, FNU Claxton, FNU Huggins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lane v. Emanuel et al
as 5:2023cv00271
Plaintiff:
JerXavier L Lane
Defendant:
Leon Emanuel, Charles Rex Scott, Paul D Carmouche and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dean v. Gregory et al
as 1:2023cv00040
Plaintiff:
Preston L Dean
Defendant:
Jackie Gregory, Ginger Fabrizio, FNU Lenoez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lane v. Lumpkin
as 23-20069
Petitioner / Appellant:
Michael Lane
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Dickerson v. Mississippi Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2023cv00099
Plaintiff:
Justin Dewayne Dickerson
Defendant:
Mississippi Department of Corrections and Tristin Lane Kiddy
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00110
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
