Cases 31 - 40 of 228
Pratt III v. Director, TDCJ
as 6:2022cv00479
Petitioner:
Herbert Hoover Pratt III
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas v. Stevens et al
as 1:2022cv00564
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Earl Thomas
Defendant:
John B Stevens, Daniel Wayne Boyd, Kevin S Laine and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Pratt v. Sanofi US Services Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv02736
Plaintiff:
Karen Pratt
Defendant:
Sanofi Aventis U.S. LLC, Sanofi US Services, Inc. f/k/a Sanofi-Aventis US Inc., Accord Healthcare, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00265
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Pratt v. Martinez
as 22-40274
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Herbert Hoover Pratt, III
Defendant / Appellee:
Miguel Martinez, Region IV Director and Gene Miller, Assistant Warden, McConnell Unit
Herrera v. State of Texas et al
as 5:2021cv01266
Plaintiff:
Francisco Herrera
Defendant:
State of Texas, Bexar County District Clerks, Bexar County District Attorney and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pratt (Rockwall Corrugating) v. CAM
as 21-90049
Petitioner:
Pratt (Rockwall Corrugating), L.L.C.
Respondent:
CAM Logistics, L.L.C.
Winston v. Pratt
as 21-50507
Defendant / Appellee:
Board of Pardons and Paroles, Hill County District Attorney Mark Pratt and Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Bravern Ray Winston
Pratt v. Hall et al
as 2:2021cv00100
Defendant:
Gene Miller and Miguel Martinez
Plaintiff:
Herbert Hoover Pratt, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pratt v. Hall et al
as 6:2021cv00192
Defendant:
Keith Gorsuch, Jane Doe, Stacie Crowley and others
Plaintiff:
Herbert Hoover Pratt, III
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.
