Cases 11 - 20 of 39
Washington v. Trammell et al
as 6:2014cv00095
Plaintiff:
Anthony B. Washington
Defendant:
Anita Trammell and David Orman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Washington v. Trammell et al
as 6:2013cv00552
Plaintiff:
Anthony B. Washington
Defendant:
Anita Trammell and David Orman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cathey v. Jones, et al
as 13-7022
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILL ROBERT CATHEY
Defendant - Appellee:
JUSTIN JONES, Director of DOC, DEBBIE MORTON, Director's Designee, RANDALL G. WORKMAN, Warden OSP and others
Cathey v. Jones, et al
as 12-7031
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILL ROBERT CATHEY
Defendant - Appellee:
JUSTIN JONES, Director of DOC, DEBBIE MORTON, Director's Designee, RANDALL G. WORKMAN, Warden OSP and others
Knox v. Orman, et al
as 12-6066
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANTONE L. KNOX
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID ORMAN, Mailroom Supervisor, MIKE OAKLEY, General Counsel, CRAIG MARSHAL, Assistant AG and others
Barrett v. Workman, et al
as 12-7010
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JACOB BARRETT
Defendant - Appellee:
RANDY WORKMAN, Warden, Oklahoma State Penitentiary, DEBBIE MORTON, Deputy Director, Oklahoma Department of Corrections, CHAD BROWN, Case Worker, Oklahoma State Penitentiary and others
Dopp v. Jones et al
as 5:2011cv01495
Plaintiff:
Richard L Dopp
Defendant:
Justin Jones, Johnny Blevins, Randy Knight and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Barrett v. Workman et al
as 6:2011cv00423
Plaintiff:
Jacob Barrett
Defendant:
Randy Workman, Debbie Morton, Chad Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Knox v. Orman et al
as 5:2011cv01031
Plaintiff:
Antone L A Knox
Defendant:
David Orman, Michael Oakley, Craig Marshal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dopp v. Jones, et al
as 11-6207
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD LYNN DOPP
Defendant - Appellee:
JUSTIN JONES, Director DOC, JOHNNY BLEVINS, IA Administrator, RANDY KNIGHT, IA Officer and others
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.
