Cases 101 - 110 of 211
Brantley v. Cooks et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2018cv00471
Plaintiff:
Lerome Brantley
Defendant:
Mary Cooks, Warden Thomas, Captain King and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Whitten v. Davis
as 1:2017cv01176
Respondent:
Director Lorie Davis
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Petitioner:
William Whitten
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas Heilman v. A. Whitten, et al
as 17-17089
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS JOHN HEILMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
A. WHITTEN, Correctional Officer, M. DOOLEY, Sergeant and F. MENDOZA
Antwon Whitten v. Leslie Fleming
as 17-7275
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANTWON WHITTEN
Defendant - Appellee:
LESLIE FLEMING, Warden - Wallens Ridge State Prison, C. FRANKS, Inmate Hearing Officer - Wallens Ridge State Prison, MARCUS ELEM, Regional Appeals Unit Administrator - Roanoke and others
Damron et al v. Dodrill et al
as 2:2017cv00337
Plaintiff:
James E Damron and Ray Scott Heid
Defendant:
Len Dodrill, Eric Graves, Melody Haskins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dodson v. Berenson et al
as 1:2017cv00327
Plaintiff:
Ricardo Dodson
Defendant:
David Berenson and J Whitten
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dodson v. Berenson et al
as 2:2017cv00132
Plaintiff:
Ricardo Dodson
Defendant:
David Berenson and J Whitten
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Roy Durham, Jr. v. Gary Mohr, et al
as 17-3007
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROY A. DURHAM, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
GARY C. MOHR, ROB L. JEFFREYS, Warden, L C COVAL and others
Browder v. Greenville County Sheriff's Office et al
as 6:2016cv02493
Plaintiff:
Chelsey Marie Browder
Defendant:
Greenville County Sheriff's Office and Stan Whitten
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eddie Whitten v. Lorie Davis, Director
as 16-41003
Petitioner - Appellant:
EDDIE RAY WHITTEN
Respondent - Appellee:
LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
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.
