Cases 41 - 50 of 20,876
Mathews v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01755
Petitioner:
Mike Naoyuki Mathews
Respondent:
TDCJ, Director Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hughes v. Lumpkin
as 5:2024cv00479
Petitioner:
Darren Tramell Hughes
Respondent:
Director of TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Duncan v. Warden Via Lobos et al
as 4:2024cv01721
Plaintiff:
Robert H Duncan
Defendant:
Warden Via Lobos, Bryan Collier, Greg Abbott and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tran v. Lumpkin
as 24-50352
Petitioner:
Billy Minh Tran
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Hawthorne v. Lumpkin
as 24-10401
Petitioner:
Patrick Hawthorne
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Apodaca v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 2:2024cv00093
Petitioner:
Victor Andrew Apodaca
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Joe v. BOP et al
as 3:2024cv01101
Plaintiff:
Demarcus Kenard Joe
Defendant:
BOP and SCFO - TDCJ Director
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Grimes v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Brian Collier, Executive Director
as 6:2024cv00170
Plaintiff:
John A Grimes
Defendant:
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Brian Collier, Executive Director
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lester v. Lumpkin
as 5:2024cv00470
Petitioner:
Timmy Heath Lester
Respondent:
Director of TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kindred v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID et al
as 6:2024cv00237
Plaintiff:
Herman Kindred
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID, Erik K. White, The State of Texas 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.
