Cases 11 - 20 of 11,839
Bell v. Cueto
as 5:2024cv00679
Plaintiff:
Darren Bell
Defendant:
Head Warden Emundo Cueto
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dickerson v. Management and Training Corp. et al
as 3:2024cv00346
Plaintiff:
Justin Dewayne Dickerson
Defendant:
Management and Training Corp., Warden Jennifer Brown, Mississippi Department of Corrections and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gutierrez v. Warden, FCI Big Spring
as 1:2024cv00090
Petitioner:
Antonio Gutierrez
Respondent:
Warden, FCI Big Spring
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Gerrans v. Warden
as 24-50481
Petitioner:
Lawrence J. Gerrans
Respondent:
S. Hijar, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution La Tuna
Reed v. Dauzat
as 24-30368
Petitioner:
Bobby Ray Reed
Respondent:
Michele Dauzat, Warden, David Wade Correctional Center
Brockman v. Lumpkin
as 24-10523
Plaintiff:
Edward Brockman
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Sharron Wilson, Assistant Prosecutor William Knight and others
Ramirez-Amaris v. FCI Big Spring Warden
as 1:2024cv00086
Petitioner:
Evanan Jose Ramirez-Amaris
Respondent:
FCI Big Spring Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Reese v. Martinez
as 24-50470
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Reese
Defendant:
Annette Martinez, Warden, Jodi Sawyer, T. Matz and others
Phillips v. McCrary et al
as 3:2024cv00335
Plaintiff:
Bobby Joe Phillips
Defendant:
Captain Unknown McCrary, Warden Donald Jackson, Lt. Mrs. Unknown Evans and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Andrews v. Warden
as 6:2024cv00788
Plaintiff:
Robert Andrews
Defendant:
Warden
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.
