Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Johnson v. Lumpkin
as 6:2022cv01005
Petitioner:
Anthony Scott Johnson
Respondent:
TDCJ Director Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 2:2019cv00188
Respondent:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner:
Anthony Scott Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Johnson v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 3:2019cv02293
Respondent:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner:
Anthony Scott Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Johnson v. T.D.C.J. Formby Unit et al
as 5:2019cv00068
Plaintiff:
Jeffery Scott Johnson
Defendant:
T.D.C.J. Formby Unit, Dennis NLN, Mrs. NFN Morallis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 2:2016cv00018
Petitioner:
Anthony Scott Johnson
Respondent:
William Stephens-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Johnson v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 1:2016cv00008
Petitioner:
Anthony Scott Johnson
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Johnson v. City of Moss Point et al
as 1:2013cv00066
Plaintiff:
Sylvester Scott Johnson
Defendant:
City of Moss Point, Moss Point Police Department, Ray Stanton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. The GEO Group, Inc.
as 5:2011cv01134
Plaintiff:
Raymond Scott Johnson
Defendant:
The GEO Group, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
David Johnson v. Burl Cain, Warden, et al
as 11-30873
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID SCOTT JOHNSON
Defendant - Appellee:
BURL CAIN, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY, JOE LAMARTINIARA, Assistant Warden, TROY PORET, Warden and others
David Johnson v. Burl Cain, Warden, et al
as 11-30581
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID SCOTT JOHNSON
Defendant - Appellee:
BURL CAIN, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY, JOE LAMARTINIARA, Assistant Warden, TROY PORET, Warden 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.
