Cases 11 - 20 of 421
UPSHAW v. COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
as 4:2023cv00189
Plaintiff:
UCASHA UPSHAW, SR
Defendant:
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kyle v. Wilson et al
as 4:2023cv00243
Plaintiff:
Lowell H. Kyle, Sr.
Defendant:
Steve Wilson, Walker County Detention Center and Official of the Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harris, Sr. v. White et al
as 3:2023cv00080
Plaintiff:
Larry Harris, Sr.
Defendant:
Warden Jemaine White, M.D. David Chaney, FNU Morgan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CHAPMAN SR v. SHAVERS et al
as 1:2023cv00143
Plaintiff:
TREVON D CHAPMAN SR
Defendant:
DEPUTY WARDEN BRIAN SHAVERS, DEPUTY WARDEN SPANN, DEPUTY WARDEN OSBORNE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LEE v. REED et al
as 5:2023cv00314
Petitioner:
JAI DEVON LEE
Respondent:
AMANDA REED, DONALD CONEWAY, SR and JOHN AND OR JANE DOES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Whipple v. Floyd County Jail
as 4:2023cv00173
Plaintiff:
Desmond Lee Whipple, Sr.
Defendant:
Floyd County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Maddox et al
as 1:2023cv03454
Petitioner:
Stephenson Lamar Smith
Respondent:
Melody M. Maddox, A. Morrell, Andrea Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Whipple v. Unknown
as 4:2023cv00214
Plaintiff:
Desmond Lee Whipple, Sr.
Defendant:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Whipple v. Unknown
as 4:2023cv00161
Plaintiff:
Desmond Lee Whipple, Sr.
Defendant:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Griffin v. Woodruff
as 3:2023cv00145
Petitioner:
Travis Griffin, Sr.
Respondent:
James Woodruff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
