Cases 81 - 90 of 104
Davis v. Workman et al
as 6:2011cv00117
Petitioner:
Tommy Davis
Respondent:
Randall G. Workman and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Schram v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2011cv00078
Plaintiff:
L. Ray Schram, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma , Marty Sirmons , Linda Morgan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wright v. Apker et al
as 6:2011cv00068
Petitioner:
James Brian Wright
Respondent:
Craig Apker and State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Prochaska v. Higgins et al
as 6:2011cv00059
Petitioner:
Raymond Prochaska
Respondent:
Haskell Higgins and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Rose v. State of Oklahoma
as 6:2010cv00370
Petitioner:
Victor Vernard Rose
Respondent:
State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Greer v. State of Oklahoma (ex rel) et al
as 6:2010cv00300
Plaintiff:
Aubrey Greer
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma (ex rel) , Oklahoma Department of Human Services , Jerral Hoffman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Douglas et al v. State of Oklahoma (ex rel) et al
as 6:2010cv00301
Plaintiff:
Jack Douglas , Deborah Douglas and M. D.
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma (ex rel) , Oklahoma Department of Human Services , Jerral Hoffman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Roberts v. Taylor et al
as 6:2010cv00280
Petitioner:
Anthony Roshon Roberts, Sr.
Respondent:
Joseph Taylor and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cannon v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2009cv00499
Plaintiff:
Jemaine Monteil Cannon
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, Department of Corrections, Randall G. Workman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
West v. Champion, et al
as 6:1997cv00243
Petitioner:
Douglas West
Respondent:
Ron Champion 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.
