Cases 41 - 50 of 84
Maxwell v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2018cv00069
Plaintiff:
Jason E. Maxwell
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, Mike Norman, Tim King and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gaines v. State of Oklahoma
as 6:2015cv00172
Petitioner:
Keith Gaines
Respondent:
State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Farrar v. Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
as 6:2015cv00164
Petitioner:
Tommy Lee Farrar
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Adams v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2015cv00093
Petitioner:
Bret Lee Adams
Respondent:
State of Oklahoma and Muskogee County Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Berryhill v. Pruitt et al
as 6:2014cv00129
Plaintiff:
Lavern Berryhill
Defendant:
Scott Pruitt, All OSP Nurses, Food Service Personel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Parker v. Anderson, et al
as 6:2014cv00041
Plaintiff:
Kevin J. Parker
Defendant:
David Anderson, Jay Nair, David Willis and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Large v. Beckham County et al
as 6:2013cv00409
Plaintiff:
Johnathan Charlse Large
Defendant:
Beckham County, State of Oklahoma, Beckham County Sheriff Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Webb v. Jones et al
as 6:2013cv00265
Petitioner:
Christopher Wayne Webb
Respondent:
Justin Jones and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Griffin v. Miller et al
as 6:2013cv00091
Petitioner:
Gary Wayne Griffin
Respondent:
Chad Miller and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Schmidt v. Dowling et al
as 6:2012cv00462
Petitioner:
Paul David Schmidt
Respondent:
Janet Dowling and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
