Cases 31 - 40 of 119
Amato v. Adams et al
as 5:2019cv00171
Petitioner:
Shane Amato
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Kentucky, Brad Adams and Dept of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Gomez v. Tenn. Dept. of Corrections et al
as 3:2019cv00281
Defendant:
Tenn. Dept. of Corrections and Connie S. Klein
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Gomez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Linton v. Louisville KY Metro Dept of Correction Jail et al
as 3:2018cv00846
Defendant:
Louisville KY Metro Dept of Correction Jail, Maintenance Staff, Kitchen Staff and others
Plaintiff:
Delvonta Linton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mack v. Tennessee Dept. of Corrections et al
as 3:2018cv01382
Plaintiff:
Delmar Mack
Defendant:
Latasha Taylor, Bledsoe Prison, Metro Government, Davidson County and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Young v. KY Dept of Corrections et al
as 0:2018cv00108
Respondent:
KY Dept of Corrections and James S. Green
Petitioner:
Christopher Lee Young
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Byner v. Tennessee Dept. of Corrections et al
as 2:2018cv00144
Plaintiff:
Auqeith Byner
Defendant:
Tennessee Dept. of Corrections, Captain Henson, Todd Wiggins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Tennessee Dept. of Corrections
as 3:2018cv00751
Plaintiff:
Richard K. Smith
Defendant:
Tennessee Dept. of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Tennessee, State of et al
as 3:2018cv00724
Defendant:
Parole Board, Tennessee Dept. of Correction and Tennessee, State of
Plaintiff:
Richard K. Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
VanDiver v. Funches et al
as 3:2018cv12299
Defendant:
Michigan Dept of Corrections, Piper, R. Bolton and others
Plaintiff:
Jerry VanDiver
Woodard v. Tennessee Dept. of Corrections et al
as 3:2018cv00680
Defendant:
Tennessee Dept. of Corrections and Jeannette Kimbro
Plaintiff:
Billy Dean Woodard, Jr.
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.
