Cases 31 - 40 of 22,888
Pickett v. Doe et al
as 1:2024cv00190
Plaintiff:
Freddie Monroe Pickett
Defendant:
John Doe, Jane Doe and Securus Technologies
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nadeau v. Director TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00471
Petitioner:
Nicholas Ryan Nadeau
Respondent:
Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Diaz v. Fletcher
as 6:2024cv00183
Petitioner:
Enrique A. Diaz
Respondent:
Sheriff Brandon Fletcher
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00469
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Frankenfield v. Galveston County et al
as 9:2024cv00097
Plaintiff:
Brian C Frankenfield
Defendant:
Galveston County, Kate Willis, John Kinnard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mosley v. UFN
as 9:2024cv00096
Plaintiff:
Marion Ray Mosley
Defendant:
ULN UFN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pickett v. Doe et al
as 1:2024cv00192
Plaintiff:
Freddie Monroe Pickett
Defendant:
John Doe, Jane Doe and Securus Technologies
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hughes v. Captain Gipson et al
as 9:2024cv00094
Plaintiff:
Charles Harold Hughes
Defendant:
Captain Gibson, Sgt Sykes and Office of the Attorney General - Amicus Curiae
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Deases v. Mr. B. Cain et al Case transferred to the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division.
as 6:2024cv00180
Plaintiff:
Estevan Deases
Respondent:
Mr. B. Cain and M.T.C.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 9:2024cv00093
Petitioner:
Hendrick Darnell Jones
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
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.
