Cases 11 - 20 of 26
Stroud v. South Carolina Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2016cv02892
Plaintiff:
Pamela Stroud
Defendant:
South Carolina Department of Corrections , Bryan Stirling , Lefford Fate and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Deans v. Bowen et al
as 5:2016cv00916
Plaintiff:
William O Deans
Defendant:
Brenda Bowen and Folline Vision Center Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Deleston v. Rivera et al
as 6:2011cv02968
Plaintiff:
Dwayne Deleston
Defendant:
Mildred Rivera, Carlton, Lieutenant Yates and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bowens v. USA
as 6:2011cv70036
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Dexter Leon Bowens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Bowen v. Doriety et al
as 8:2010cv01848
Plaintiff:
Travis Lee Bowen
Defendant:
James Doriety, Scotty Bodiford, Tracy Krein and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bowen v. Doriety et al
as 2:2010cv01848
Plaintiff:
Travis Lee Bowen
Defendant:
James Doriety , Scotty Bodiford , Tracy Krein and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bowen v. Ariail et al
as 8:2010cv01249
Plaintiff:
Travis Lee Bowen
Defendant:
Robert Ariail and Steve Loftis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bowens et al v. South Carolina Attorney General Office et al
as 2:2010cv00668
Plaintiff:
Melvin Bowens and Jennifer Ann Youmans
Defendant:
South Carolina Attorney General Office and 9th Judicial Circuit Family Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (County)
Bowens et al v. Canon et al
as 2:2010cv00044
Petitioner:
Melvin Bowens and Jennifer Ann Youmans
Defendant:
Al Canon, Mitch Lucas and Scarlett A Wilson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (County)
Bowens v. United States of America
as 8:2010cv00038
Petitioner:
Dexter Leon Bowens
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
