Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Woodard v. Illinois
as 3:2024cv01251
Petitioner:
Anthony Thomas Dewayne Woodard and Anthony D Woodard
Defendant:
People of the State of Illinois
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
THOMAS v. SECREST et al
as 1:2023cv01212
Plaintiff:
MILES ANTHONY THOMAS
Defendant:
ALYSSA SECREST, ANTHONY GIBSON, MR. HARTZELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. Secrest et al
as 3:2023cv00622
Plaintiff:
Miles Anthony Thomas
Defendant:
Alyssa Secrest, Anthony Gibson, Hartzell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
THOMAS v. KOLEHOUSE et al
as 2:2022cv00578
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ANTHONY THOMAS
Defendant:
MICHAEL ANTHONY KOLEHOUSE and TROMLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
EDMONDSON et al v. DECATUR COUNTY DETENTION CENTER
as 1:2021cv00499
Plaintiff:
JARED HENSON, JUDD PONSLER, STANLEY EDMONDSON and others
Defendant:
DECATUR COUNTY DETENTION CENTER and JAMI HELMS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Calloway
as 1:2019cv02324
Respondent:
People Of The State Of Illinois and Victor Calloway
Petitioner:
Anthony Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Thomas v. Davis et al
as 1:2018cv01195
Plaintiff:
Anthony Thomas
Defendant:
J Davis, Susan Prentince, . Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Illinois Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2016cv06439
Plaintiff:
Anthony Thomas
Defendant:
Illinois Department of Corrections, M Abernathy, D Phillips and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Dorothy
as 1:2015cv04495
Petitioner:
Anthony Thomas
Respondent:
Stephanie Dorothy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
United States of America v. Thomas
as 1:2013cv03799
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Anthony Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Remedies on motion attacking sentence
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.
