Cases 31 - 40 of 770
Schultz v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company et al
as 3:2022cv00777
Plaintiff:
Duke Schultz
Defendant:
State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, State Farm General Insurance Company and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Spicer v. Bennett et al
as 3:2022cv05358
Plaintiff:
Wayne Spicer
Defendant:
Clay Bennett, Zebulon Lee Tucker, Piper Barton and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Cruz v. TDCJ et al
as 7:2022cv00091
Plaintiff:
David Cruz
Defendant:
TDCJ, Sheriff Dept, Assistant Warden FNU Lopez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00931
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv01010
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Duke v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 6:2022cv00950
Petitioner:
Timmy Lynn Duke
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sheppard v. Duke
as 7:2022cv00089
Petitioner:
Rodney Sheppard, Jr.
Respondent:
Jordan Sandoval, Sheriff David Duke and Marty Cannedy's Secretary Ms. Bishop
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Peters v. Wichita County Jail et al
as 1:2022cv00832
Petitioner:
Marc Arron Peters
Defendant:
Wichita County Jail and David Duke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Peters v. Duke, Sheriff, Wichita County, Texas
as 7:2022cv00078
Plaintiff:
Marc Arron Peters
Defendant:
David Duke, Sheriff, Wichita County, Texas, Sgt. Reynolds, Sheriff Dept-Rico and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
