Cases 11 - 20 of 571
Mann v. The Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branch of Government et al
as 1:2020cv00267
Defendant:
The Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branch of Government, Tate Reeves, Jim Hood and others
Plaintiff:
Kelly Mann
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chapman v. Williams, et al
as 3:2020cv00200
Respondent:
Jessie J. Williams and Jim Hood
Petitioner:
Robert Chapman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Dearing v. U.S. Postal Service et al
as 5:2020cv00131
Plaintiff:
Dewayne Dearing
Defendant:
U.S. Postal Service, Wilkinson County Correctional Facility, The Great State of Mississippi c/o Jim Hood and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Clark v. Turner et al
as 3:2019cv00300
Petitioner:
Patrick Evans Clark
Respondent:
Attorney General Jim Hood and Marshall Turner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Osborne v. State of Miss. et al
as 4:2019cv00185
Respondent:
State of Miss. and Attorney General Jim Hood
Petitioner:
Emerson Osborne
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Carr v. Hall et al
as 3:2019cv00274
Respondent:
Pelicia Hall and Jim Hood
Petitioner:
Anthony B. Carr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Curry v. Settlemires et al
as 3:2019cv00251
Petitioner:
Willie Earl Curry
Respondent:
Roger Settlemires and Attorney General Jim Hood
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis v. King et al
as 4:2019cv00161
Petitioner:
Elbert Davis
Respondent:
Attorney General Jim Hood and Ronald King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jackson v. Rule et al
as 4:2019cv00158
Respondent:
Warden Barry Rule and Attorney General Jim Hood
Petitioner:
Herman Jackson, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Camacho v. Department of Justice of Oxford Mississippi et al
as 3:2019cv00195
Defendant:
Steven Farese, Department of Justice of Oxford Mississippi, Alison Farese Thomas and others
Plaintiff:
Kathy Sue Camacho
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.
