Cases 41 - 50 of 50
Roach v. Doolin et al
as 4:2007cv00112
Plaintiff:
Roger Wayne Philpot Roach
Defendant:
Elvis Doolin, Norman Payton, Greg Clark and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Odom v. Dietz et al
as 3:2007cv00427
Plaintiff:
Glenn D. Odom
Defendant:
Robert Dietz, Darrell Goodlett, Barbara Mattingly and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rayner v. Dailey et al
as 3:2007cv00316
Petitioner:
Barry W. Rayner
Respondent:
Tom Dailey and Greg Taylor
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Rayner v. Campbell, et al
as 3:2007cv00300
Petitioner:
Barry Wayne Rayner
Respondent:
Tom Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Allen v. Louisville Metro Corrections Department et al
as 3:2007cv00296
Plaintiff:
Joseph Wayne Allen
Defendant:
Louisville Metro Corrections Department, Tom Campbell and Jeremiah Furman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Croney et al v. Fletcher et al
as 3:2007cv00274
Plaintiff:
Fred Douglas Croney, Jr., Jonathan Kendrick Jackson and John Scott Patterson
Defendant:
Ernie Fletcher, Tom Hardesty, Hart McGivens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. Jefferson County Medical Director, et al
as 3:2007cv00153
Plaintiff:
Stephen E Thomas, Jr
Defendant:
Jefferson County Corrections, Dr. Miller, Captain Dietz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rayner v. Rees et al
as 3:2007cv00124
Plaintiff:
Barry Wayne Rayner
Defendant:
Tom Cambell and Irv Maze
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Works v. Dailey
as 3:2007cv00056
Petitioner:
Derek Bryan Works
Respondent:
Tom Dailey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Odom v. Campbell
as 3:2007cv00060
Plaintiff:
Glenn D. Odom
Defendant:
Tom D. Campbell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
