Cases 1 - 10 of 26
Smith v Dept of Probation, Parole & Pardon Services
as 6:2022cv02256
Plaintiff:
Khammesherma Smith, Kham Smith and Khamesher Smith
Defendant:
The Dept of Probation, Parole & Pardon Services, Antonio Hickman, NFN Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Hays v. Dallas County Jail
as 5:2022cv00161
Plaintiff:
Rosablanca Hays and Rosablanca Monique Hayes
Defendant:
Dallas County Jail, CO NFN Lewis, CO NFN Boyero and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jones, Jr v. Davis
as 3:2022cv00491
Plaintiff:
Kenneth R Jones, Jr
Defendant:
NFN Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Patricio Estrada v. Director, TDCJ-CID, et al
as 5:2020cv00030
Defendant:
Ms. NFN Davis, Ms. NFN Williams, Mr. NFN Thompson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Davis et al
as 5:2019cv00174
Defendant:
Officer NFN Smith, Officer NFN Esquivel, Lorie Davis and others
Plaintiff:
Tyson Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sawyer v. Rachels et al
as 7:2019cv00063
Defendant:
1000 Unknown TDCJ Officials, NFN Davis and Diana L Rachels
Plaintiff:
Thomas Sawyer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Martinez v. Davis et al
as 2:2018cv00152
Defendant:
NFN Lira, Unnamed Officers, NFN Chisum and others
Plaintiff:
Roberto Martinez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gallegos v. Basse et al
as 2:2018cv00002
Plaintiff:
Jose Gallegos
Defendant:
NFN Basse, Alfreda Carreon, NFN Perez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Russie v. Davis et al
as 2:2017cv00225
Plaintiff:
Michael Marvin Russie
Defendant:
Lorie Davis, Keven Foley, Damon Andrews and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wooten v. Texas Tech Mental-Medical Services et al
as 2:2017cv00015
Plaintiff:
Chris Wooten
Defendant:
Texas Tech Mental-Medical Services, Mike Jones, NFN Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
