Cases 101 - 110 of 1,220
Jones v. Lumpkin et al
as 4:2022cv04519
Plaintiff:
Kevin J. Jones
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Warden R. Bowers, J Rodriguez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rodriguez v. Woodburn
as 2:2022cv00237
Plaintiff:
Abram Henry Rodriguez and Chris Rodriguez
Defendant:
Doug Woodburn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Director, TDCJ-CID et al
as 3:2022cv02758
Petitioner:
Kevin Jones and Kevin Jerome Jones
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID, NFN Bowers, NFN Rodriguez and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodriguez v. USA
as 4:2022cv01038
Petitioner:
Ricardo Ruiz Rodriguez
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate/Correct Illegal Sentence
Jones v. Director, TDCJ-CID et al
as 4:2022cv04252
Plaintiff:
Kevin Jerome Jones
Defendant:
Director TDCJ-CID, Warden R. Bowers, C Garcia and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodriguez v. Woodburn ***CASE TRANSFERRED TO NDTX***
as 6:2022cv00461
Plaintiff:
Abram Henry Rodriguez
Defendant:
Doug Woodburn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv01299
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rodriguez v. Williamson County Jail et al
as 1:2022cv01262
Petitioner:
Federico Rodriguez
Respondent:
Williamson County Jail, FNU Fuller and Bradford J. Glendening
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodriguez v. Woodburn
as 2:2022cv00226
Plaintiff:
Abram Henry Rodriguez
Defendant:
Doug Woodburn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Joseph v. Rodriguez et al
as 1:2022cv00153
Plaintiff:
Ronald O. Joseph, Jr
Defendant:
B. Rodriguez, T. Wicktorick and R. Maldonado
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
