Cases 21 - 30 of 332
Broome v. Temple Texas Police Department et al
as 6:2022cv00892
Plaintiff:
Richard Broome
Defendant:
Temple Texas Police Department, Temple Texas Code Enforcment Employees, Sgt M. Trunecker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tarver v. Collier
as 3:2022cv01616
Petitioner:
Milton Lee Tarver
Respondent:
Brian Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Moreno v. Bollinger
as 2:2022cv00131
Plaintiff:
Victor Moreno
Defendant:
Milton Troy Bollinger
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Milton Gobert v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Crimi
as 22-70002
Petitioner / Appellant:
Milton Dwayne Gobert
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Hinson v. City of Abilene et al
as 1:2022cv00036
Plaintiff:
Milton Hinson
Defendant:
City of Abilene, Craig Jordan and C Hall
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hinson v. City of Abilene
as 22-10440
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Milton Hinson
Defendant / Appellee:
City of Abilene, Craig Jordan, ACPD Internal Affairs and C. Hall, ACPD Road Deputy
Moore v. The State of Texas
as 3:2022cv00743
Petitioner:
Mark Milton Moore and Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles
Respondent:
The State of Texas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Grizzle v. Mcintire et al
as 5:2022cv00017
Plaintiff:
Robert Grizzle
Defendant:
Bryson Mcintire, Madison Hendricks, Lindsay Hummel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv00210
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Collier v. Burnes et al
as 3:2022cv00300
Petitioner:
Darron LaShawn Collier
Respondent:
Ty Burnes and James Milton
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.
