Cases 31 - 40 of 94
Hoke v. Lyle et al
as 6:2016cv00045
Plaintiff:
Stephen Ray Hoke
Defendant:
Lyle, Nathan Deal, Stanley Bryson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Valencia v. D. Ray James Correctional Facility et al
as 5:2016cv00015
Petitioner:
Agustin Rodriguez Valencia
Respondent:
D. Ray James Correctional Facility, Tracy Johns, Designation & Sentence Computation Center and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Sabroso v. D. Ray James Correction Facility et al
as 5:2016cv00013
Petitioner:
Carlos Garcia Sabroso
Respondent:
D. Ray James Correction Facility, Tracy Johns, Perry Rogers and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Nunez v. D. Ray James Correction Facility et al
as 5:2016cv00012
Petitioner:
Ricardo Padilla Nunez
Respondent:
D. Ray James Correction Facility, Tracy Johns, Geo Group Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Dan v. D. Ray James Correctional Institution
as 5:2015cv00093
Petitioner:
Daniel Dan
Respondent:
D. Ray James Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st
Ballou v. Bryson et al
as 6:2015cv00125
Plaintiff:
Curtis Ray Ballou
Defendant:
Homer Bryson and Stanley Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lamour v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 5:2015cv00084
Petitioner:
Rodelyn Lamour
Respondent:
Bureau of Prisons, Charles Samuels, D. Ray James Correctional Facility and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Mitschell et al v. Broome et al
as 6:2015cv00020
Plaintiff:
Andrew Michael Mitschell
Defendant:
Janet Brewton, Dean C. Broome, Steve Nicolou and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ballou v. Owen et al
as 1:2014cv00202
Plaintiff:
Curtis Ray Ballou
Defendant:
Brian Owen, Stan Shepard and Mary Alston
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Flowers v. Shaw et al
as 2:2014cv00138
Plaintiff:
Anthony Flowers
Defendant:
Herb Shaw, Ricky A. Reddish, Sr., Don Darden and others
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.
