Cases 1 - 10 of 686
Headrick v. David L. Moss Criminal Justice Center
as 6:2024cv00323
Defendant:
David L. Moss Criminal Justice Center
Plaintiff:
Joshua David Headrick
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morgan v. Biden et al
as 5:2024cv00942
Defendant:
David Rogers, Lester Wright, Joe Biden and others
Plaintiff:
David Brian Morgan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sebastian v. Biden et al
as 5:2024cv00936
Petitioner:
George J Sebastian
Respondent:
David Rogers, United States of America and Joe Biden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Clark v. Stitt et al
as 4:2024cv00363
Defendant:
Steven Harpe, Jennifer Cline and Kevin J Stitt
Plaintiff:
David George Clark
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morgan v. Biden et al
as 6:2024cv00263
Defendant:
Steven Harpe, Kevin Stitt, Lester Wright and others
Plaintiff:
David B. Morgan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Porter v. Tulsa County et al
as 4:2024cv00343
Plaintiff:
Shannon La'Shea Porter
Defendant:
Tulsa County and David L. Moss
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Fletcher v. Whitten et al
as 5:2024cv00692
Defendant:
Chris Mattingly, Securus Technologies, Mark Knutson and others
Plaintiff:
Randall Edward Fletcher
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Cole
as 5:2024cv00647
Petitioner:
James Jackson
Respondent:
David Cole
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Martin v. Rodgers
as 5:2024cv00636
Respondent:
David Rodgers
Petitioner:
Dennis Martin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (state)
Jackson v. Cole et al
as 5:2024cv00635
Respondent:
Steve Harpe and David Cole
Petitioner:
James Jackson
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.
