Cases 41 - 50 of 1,450
Church v. Rangel et al
as 5:2023cv00323
Plaintiff:
Willie Church
Defendant:
Lt. Romeo Rangel, Lt. Aaron Cavazos and Lt. Sven Strack
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Warren v. Pennington
as 3:2023cv00144
Plaintiff:
Willie Joe Warren
Defendant:
Joedy Pennington
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
El Shabazz Bey v. Tang et al
as 4:2023cv00151
Plaintiff:
Mustafa El Shabazz Bey and Noland Roosevelt Byrd
Defendant:
Michael Tang and Greg Willis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carr v. Kirkland et al
as 2:2023cv00069
Petitioner:
Willie Ty'rone Carr
Respondent:
Michael Kirkland and Craig Fletcher
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Brady v. Lumpkin
as 23-50126
Petitioner / Appellant:
Willie Lee Brady, Jr.
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Willis v. LA Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2023cv00159
Plaintiff:
Howard Willis
Defendant:
LA Department of Corrections, David Dauzat, Eighth Judicial District Judge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hurst v. Hall et al
as 4:2023cv00022
Plaintiff:
Justin D. Hurst
Defendant:
Pelicia Hall, Jerry Williams, Timothy Morris and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Medina v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv00334
Petitioner:
Willie Medina and Guillermo Flores Medina
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Whitfield v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv00333
Petitioner:
Willie Love Whitfield
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Letcher et al
as 3:2023cv00053
Plaintiff:
Willie Jones
Defendant:
Keenan Letcher and Tim Hooper
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.
