Cases 1 - 10 of 169
Alvarez v. Lumpkin et al
as 1:2024cv00180
Plaintiff:
Edwing Ahmed Alvarez
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Timothy Fitzpatrick, Christopher L Norsworthy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Alvarez v. Lumpkin et al
as 1:2024cv00181
Plaintiff:
Edwing Ahmed Alvarez
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Timothy Fitzpatrick, Angela N Chevalier and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Polk v. Lumpkin
as 9:2024cv00092
Petitioner:
Mavis Ray Polk
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lester v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00413
Petitioner:
Timmy Heath Lester
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas v. Lumpkin
as 6:2024cv00150
Petitioner:
Antoine Thomas
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garcia v. Lumpkin
as 6:2024cv00142
Petitioner:
Antonio Andres Garcia
Respondent:
Director of TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Farmer v. Lumpkin
as 1:2024cv00139
Petitioner:
Charles M Farmer
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garcia v. Lumpkin, Director, TDCJ: Case electronically transferred to (Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division).
as 6:2024cv00129
Petitioner:
Antonio A Garcia
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, TDCJ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Clark v. Lumpkin
as 1:2024cv00118
Petitioner:
Herbert Charles Clark
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Weaver v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00238
Petitioner:
Joseph Weaver
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin and 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.
