Cases 11 - 20 of 46
Ketchum v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles (INMATE 1)
as 2:2018cv00102
Plaintiff:
William Mark Ketchum
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Isbell v. Phoenix, City of et al
as 2:2018cv00290
Plaintiff:
William Mark Isbell
Defendant:
Phoenix, City of, Jody Bodway, Andrea Perez-Santillan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McGhee v. United States of America
as 1:2017cv00072
Petitioner:
William Mark McGhee
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
England v. Collier-TDCJ Executive Director
as 3:2017cv00592
Petitioner:
William Mark England
Respondent:
Brian Collier-TDCJ Executive Director
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Ashby v. Tollison et al
as 8:2016cv02581
Plaintiff:
William Mark Ashby
Defendant:
Officer Tollison, Officer Morgan and Joe Tyson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
William Gibson v. Lorie Davis, Director
as 16-50827
Petitioner - Appellant:
WILLIAM MARK GIBSON
Respondent - Appellee:
LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Ashby v. Johnson Detention Center et al
as 8:2015cv04727
Plaintiff:
William Mark Ashby
Defendant:
Johnson Detention Center, Laurens County, Ford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ashby v. Aiken et al
as 8:2015cv04461
Plaintiff:
William Mark Ashby
Defendant:
Joseph Aiken, Johnson Detention Center, Lauren County and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
William Sullivan v. William Stephens, Director
as 13-10883
Petitioner - Appellant:
WILLIAM MARK SULLIVAN
Respondent - Appellee:
WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
William Sullivan v. William Stephens, Director
as 13-10870
Petitioner - Appellant:
WILLIAM MARK SULLIVAN
Respondent - Appellee:
WILLIAM STEPHENS, 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.
