Cases 61 - 70 of 88
Keith v. Wagner et al
as 3:2011cv00218
Plaintiff:
David Earl Keith
Defendant:
Charles Wagner, Unknown Gardner, L Allen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
David Sweed v. Rick Thaler, Director
as 11-50301
Petitioner - Appellant:
DAVID EARL SWEED
Respondent - Appellee:
RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Shaw v. United States Of America
as 6:2011cv00032
Petitioner:
David Earl Shaw
Respondent:
United States Of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Majors v. United States Of America
as 6:2011cv00007
Petitioner:
David Earl Majors
Respondent:
United States Of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
USA v. David Kate
as 10-11040
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
DAVID EARL KATES
USA v. David Kate
as 10-10654
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
DAVID EARL KATES
Sweed v. Thaler
as 1:2010cv00393
Petitioner:
David Earl Sweed
Respondent:
Rick Thaler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. United States Of America
as 6:2010cv00108
Petitioner:
David Earl Johnson
Respondent:
United States Of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
David Kates v. Micieli, et al
as 09-30944
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID EARL KATES
Defendant - Appellee:
MICIELI, MANDALFO and GREGORY KIZZIAH
David Hollie v. Upendra Katragadda, et al
as 09-40717
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID EARL HOLLIE
Defendant - Appellee:
UPENDRA KATRAGADDA, Individually and In His Official Capacity as Assistant Warden, KAREN WILLIAMS, Individually and In Her Official Capacity as Classification Chairperson, CONNIE HUNTER, Individually and In Her Official Capacity as Grievance Investigator and others
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.
