Cases 1 - 10 of 868
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv01803
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Smith v. Douglas et al
as 3:2024cv00971
Defendant:
Ethan Ellis, Kevin Herrington, Quentin Douglas and others
Plaintiff:
Derrick Dwayne Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hicks v. Hill County Sheriff's Office et al
as 6:2024cv00344
Plaintiff:
Derrick Lashun Hicks
Defendant:
Hill County Sheriff's Office, Hill County Jail and Dalvin Rubio
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hanks v. Conroe City Police et al
as 4:2024cv03004
Defendant:
Detective Derrick Dunn, Montgomery County Sheriffs Dept, Wellpath 1 and others
Plaintiff:
Clifton Todd Hanks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Pike County Jail
as 5:2024cv00067
Plaintiff:
Michael Derrick Smith
Defendant:
Pike County Jail
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carroll v. Chambers, et al.
as 3:2024cv00302
Defendant:
Mr. Derrick Chambers, St. Julian and Mrs. Williams
Plaintiff:
Wiley Zachary Carroll
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fields v. Neal
as 5:2024cv00070
Plaintiff:
Derrick D. Fields
Defendant:
Jeff Neal
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Moore v. USA
as 4:2024cv00576
Petitioner:
Derrick Tyrone Moore
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00568
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Nelson v. State of Mississippi
as 1:2024cv00103
Respondent:
State of Mississippi
Petitioner:
Derrick Nelson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
