Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Davis v. Jeffery et al
as 4:2023cv03197
Petitioner:
Michael David Davis
Respondent:
Rob Jeffery and Tagert Boyd
Interested Party:
Nebraska Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Larry Davis v. Barry Sims, et al
as 23-2777
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Larry David Davis
Defendant / Appellee:
Barry Sims, Judge, 7th Division, Pulaski County Circuit Court, Reese Lancaster, Prosecutor, Pulaski County Prosecutor's Office, Anna Catherine Cargile, Prosecutor, Pulaski County Prosecutor's Office and others
Davis v. Sims et al
as 4:2023cv00311
Plaintiff:
Larry David Davis
Defendant:
Barry A Sims, Reese Lancaster, Anna Catherine Cargile and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Larry Davis v. Dexter Payne
as 23-1322
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Larry David Davis
Defendant / Appellee:
Dexter Payne, Director, ADC
Larry Davis v. Amy Douglas, et al
as 23-1255
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Larry David Davis
Defendant / Appellee:
Amy Jackson Douglas, Deputy Public Defender, Little Rock, William R. Simpson, Jr., Chief Public Defender, Little Rock and Kent C. Krause, Public Defender, Little Rock
Davis v. Payne
as 4:2021cv00496
Defendant:
Dexter Payne
Plaintiff:
Larry David Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis v. Payne
as 4:2021cv00462
Defendant:
Dexter Payne
Plaintiff:
Larry David Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis v. Cargile et al
as 4:2021cv00426
Defendant:
Cargile, Barry A Sims, Beth C Kremers and others
Plaintiff:
Larry David Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Douglas et al
as 4:2021cv00360
Defendant:
Kent C Krause, William R Simpson and Amy Jackson Douglas
Plaintiff:
Larry David Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Arkansas, State of
as 4:2021cv00070
Plaintiff:
Larry David Davis
Defendant:
Arkansas, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
