Cases 1 - 10 of 29
Winding v. Reeves et al
as 3:2023cv00315
Plaintiff:
James C. Winding
Defendant:
Govornor Tate Reeves, MDCO Commissioner Burl Cain, MS Attorney General Lynn Fitch and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Summers v. Collier et al
as 1:2022cv00605
Plaintiff:
Anthony Leon Summers
Defendant:
Bryan Collier, Oscar Mendoza, Stephen Bryant and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stansberry v. Mentz
as 2:2021cv01744
Plaintiff:
Hunter Deagun Stansberry
Defendant:
Michael P Mentz
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Myles v. Barlow et al
as 1:2020cv00486
Defendant:
Michael P Moriarity, Yolanda Barlow, Kiyo J Moye and others
Plaintiff:
Tony Orlando Myles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mark Anthony Santos v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director, TDCJ-CID
as 5:2020cv01163
Respondent:
Michael P. Britt, Director TDCJ-CID and Bobby Lumpkin
Petitioner:
Mark Anthony Santos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cruz v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 5:2020cv00179
Respondent:
Bryan Collier, Michael P. Britt, Joe L. Castillo and others
Petitioner:
Humberto Rosales Cruz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Sautos v. Britt et al
as 5:2020cv00153
Respondent:
Michael P. Britt and Joe L. Castillo
Petitioner:
Mark Anthony Santos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cruz v. Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 4:2020cv02303
Defendant:
Michael P Britt, Jr. Joel Castillo and Lorie Davis
Plaintiff:
Humberto Rosales Cruz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cruz v. Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 5:2020cv00127
Respondent:
Michael P. Britt, Joel Castillo and Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner:
Humberto Rosales Cruz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Brooks v. Cato et al
as 6:2019cv00236
Defendant:
Derek E Woodridge, Michael A Cullum, Michael P Britt and others
Plaintiff:
Charles David Brooks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
