Cases 31 - 40 of 784
Stevens v. Rowe et al
as 5:2023cv00200
Plaintiff:
Zachius M Stevens
Defendant:
Kelly S. Rowe, Mike Reed, Cody Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stevens v. Rowe et al
as 5:2023cv00182
Plaintiff:
Zachius M Stevens
Defendant:
Sheriff Kelly S Rowe, Mike Reed, Cody Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Clark et al
as 3:2023cv01841
Plaintiff:
Kevin Jerome Jones
Defendant:
Mr J Clark, Mr D Skeggs, Mr M Gruver and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tipton v. Lumpkin
as 23-50570
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Charlton Reed Tipton
Defendant / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Larissa Wysocki, Assistant Warden, Connally Unit, Amanda Acousta, Sergeant of Correctional Officers and others
Joseph Richards v. Kelly S. Rowe, et al
as 5:2023cv00171
Plaintiff:
Joseph Richards
Defendant:
Kelly S. Rowe, Mike Reed, Cody S. Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Richards v. Rowe et al
as 5:2023cv00151
Plaintiff:
Joseph Richards
Defendant:
Kelly S. Rowe, Mike Reed, Cody Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Reed v. John Doe
as 3:2023cv00439
Plaintiff:
Daniel Derrell Reed, Jr.
Defendant:
John Doe
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Eskew v. LeBlanc
as 23-30439
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Avery Shawn Eskew
Defendant / Appellee:
James LeBlanc, Chris Stinson, Unknown Assistant Warden and others
Reed v. USA
as 3:2023cv00523
Petitioner:
Quinn P. Reed
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Reed v. USA
as 3:2023cv00496
Petitioner:
Quinn P. Reed
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
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.
