Cases 31 - 40 of 40
Loyde v. Middle Tennessee Mental Health Institute et al
as 2:2013cv02846
Plaintiff:
Ed Henry Loyde
Defendant:
Middle Tennessee Mental Health Institute, David Ryker, Charles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Loyde v. CCA Medical Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv02845
Plaintiff:
Ed Henry Loyde
Defendant:
CCA Medical Services, Inc., Webber, Washington and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ed Loyde v. Shelby County Justice Center, et al
as 12-6455
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ED HENRY LOYDE
Defendant - Appellee:
SHELBY COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER and CCS MEDICAL
Loyde v. Shelby County Justice Center et al
as 2:2012cv02878
Plaintiff:
Ed Loyde
Defendant:
Shelby County Justice Center, Bishop and Kim Palmer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Loyde v. Shelby County Justice Center et al
as 2:2012cv02705
Plaintiff:
Ed Henry Loyde
Defendant:
Shelby County Justice Center and CCS Medical
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Loyd #247625 v. Caruso
as 1:2010cv00198
Plaintiff:
James David Loyd #247625
Defendant:
Patricia Caruso
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Loyd #620818 v Pratt
as 1:2009cv00964
Petitioner:
Michael T. Loyd #620818
Respondent:
David Pratt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Norment v. Correction Corporation of America et al
as 2:2009cv02367
Petitioner:
Freddie Norment, Jr.
Respondent:
Correction Corporation of America, Marcel Mills and Loyd Delgado
Defendant:
Andrew Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James Loyd v. Leonard Townsend, et al
as 08-2025
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES LOYD
Defendant - Appellee:
LEONARD TOWNSEND, JACQUELINE GEORGE and LISA RAYMOND
Loyd v. Townsend et al
as 2:2008cv12536
Plaintiff:
James Loyd
Defendant:
Leonard Townsend, Jacqueline George and Lisa Raymond
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
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.
