Cases 21 - 30 of 1,253
GREEN v. JEFFERSON et al
as 5:2024cv00070
Plaintiff:
TYRONE GREEN
Defendant:
DEPUTY WARDEN JEFFERSON, DEPUTY WARDEN JONES, DEPUTY WARDEN McDaniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SMITH v. MCDANIEL et al
as 5:2024cv00069
Plaintiff:
ORLANDO SMITH
Defendant:
DEPUTY WARDEN MCDANIEL, DEPUTY WARDEN JONES, FULLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Rogers State Prison et al
as 6:2024cv00007
Plaintiff:
Shaun Jones
Defendant:
Rogers State Prison and Georgia Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Jones
as 1:2024cv00762
Plaintiff:
Jermaine Andrew Davis
Defendant:
Officer Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Jackson et al
as 1:2024cv00736
Plaintiff:
Stephenson Lamar Smith
Defendant:
Ted Jackson, Officer Jones and Officer Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Prisoner Civil Rights
Parker v. Jones
as 1:2024cv00702
Petitioner:
Otis Parker
Respondent:
Mr. Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Holmes et al v. Chatham County Detention Center et al
as 4:2024cv00028
Plaintiff:
Keiron Kenneth Holmes, Sr., Micky Eugene Hamilton, Jed Allen Taylor and others
Defendant:
Chatham County Detention Center, John T. Wilcher, Chatham County Sheriff Office and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Woodruff
as 1:2024cv00543
Plaintiff:
Omar Derwayne Jones
Defendant:
James Woodruff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Woodruff
as 3:2024cv00024
Plaintiff:
Omar Derwayne Jones
Defendant:
James Woodruff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hallman v. Smith et al
as 1:2024cv00015
Plaintiff:
DERRICK HALLMAN
Defendant:
WARDEN OTIS SMITH, JONES and SABRINA PORTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
