Cases 1 - 10 of 47
PERRY v. CAHN et al
as 3:2023cv21252
Plaintiff:
KEITH GEORGE PERRY
Defendant:
R CAHN, BROWN, ERIC CUMMINGS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DAVIES v. HOLMES COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT et al
as 5:2023cv00187
Plaintiff:
ANTWOIN DAVIES
Defendant:
HOLMES COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT, JOHN TATE, MICHAEL RALEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HOLMES v. YOUNG et al
as 5:2023cv00099
Plaintiff:
ERRICK HOLMES, JR
Defendant:
L J YOUNG, T STALL, MICHELLE A WITALEC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GOLDEN v. HOLMS et al
as 3:2022cv19114
Plaintiff:
CHARLES GOLDEN, JR
Defendant:
T HOLMS, HARPER L FORREST, WATSON TYLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00083
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
LEBARR v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2021cv00233
Plaintiff:
DWAYNE LEBARR
Defendant:
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, T CHILDREE, J BAILEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JIMINEZ v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2021cv00153
Plaintiff:
DAVID JIMINEZ
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, HOLMES CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION and STATE OF FLORIDA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PORTER v. INCH et al
as 4:2020cv00230
Defendant:
Z CULPEPPER, M HOOD, KIM MINER and others
Plaintiff:
AARON C PORTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ORTIZ v. HOLMES CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION et al
as 5:2020cv00034
Defendant:
B DAY and HOLMES CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Plaintiff:
ARTURO ORTIZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HART v. INCH et al
as 5:2019cv00401
Plaintiff:
RANDY A HART
Defendant:
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, HOLMES CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION and MARK INCH
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.
