Cases 21 - 30 of 370
BRAZILL v. BRANNON et al
as 5:2023cv00067
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL R BRAZILL
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER R BRANNON, JONATHAN JONES, GLENN E HANCOCK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SCOTT v. SMALL et al
as 3:2023cv04494
Plaintiff:
TYLER ROBERT SCOTT
Defendant:
CODY JAMES SMALL and COMBS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MORRIS v. MIDDLEBROOKS et al
as 5:2023cv00042
Plaintiff:
LARRY MORRIS and RICKY FULTON
Defendant:
SCOTT MIDDLEBROOKS, JACQUELYN BLACKMON, T W TAYLOR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
COLLAZO v. DUVALL
as 5:2023cv00040
Plaintiff:
JUAN BEAZ COLLAZO
Defendant:
SCOTT DUVALL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SCOTT v. DWIGHT et al
as 3:2023cv03469
Plaintiff:
TYLER ROBERT SCOTT
Defendant:
RYAN DAY DWIGHT, OFFICER DOVE, ANGELA GORDUN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WESOLEK v. DIXON et al
as 5:2023cv00006
Plaintiff:
STEVEN A WESOLEK, STEVEN A. MATHIS and STEVEN ALLAN WESOLEK
Defendant:
MARK INCH, SCOTT DUVALL, JEFFREY BROWN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JOHNSON v. SCOTT
as 3:2023cv00105
Plaintiff:
RODNEY DEWAYNE JOHNSON
Defendant:
A SCOTT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RAFSKY v. SECRETARY OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 5:2022cv00307
Petitioner:
DILLON SCOTT RAFSKY
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BECKER v. USA
as 4:2022cv00446
Petitioner:
JEREMY SCOTT BECKER
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
BECKER v. USA
as 5:2022cv00294
Petitioner:
JEREMY SCOTT BECKER
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
