Cases 31 - 40 of 41
HAMPTON v. BLACKWOOD
as 4:2012cv00045
Plaintiff:
RUFUS HAMPTON
Defendant:
JAMES BLACKWOOD, KEITH MURPHY, L MCDONALD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald v. Oklahoma State of
as 5:2011cv00879
Petitioner:
Randall L McDonald
Respondent:
Oklahoma State of and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Brandon McDonald v. Pat Knauth, et al
as 10-40169
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BRANDON L. MCDONALD
Defendant - Appellee:
J. SLIGER, Beaumont Police Officer and FRANK COFFIN, Officer
McDonald v. Welch
as 3:2010cv00016
Petitioner:
John L McDonald
Respondent:
Robert Welch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kenon McDonald v. Arellano, et al
as 09-51110
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KENON L. MCDONALD
Defendant - Appellee:
ARELLANO, Bexar County, RALPH LOPEZ, Former Bexar County Sheriff, AMEDEO ORTIZ, Bexar County and others
McDonald v. Oklahoma State of et al
as 5:2009cv00710
Plaintiff:
Randell L McDonald
Defendant:
Oklahoma State of and OU Medical Center Police
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Seal 1 v. USA
as 1:2009cv00080
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Deborah L. McDonald
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
McDonald v. Mahon et al
as 2:2009cv00272
Plaintiff:
Arthur L. McDonald
Defendant:
Dan Mahon, A. Dave Robinson, F. Coleman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McDonald v. Arellano et al
as 5:2009cv00426
Plaintiff:
Kenon L. McDonald
Defendant:
FNU Arellano, Ralph Lopez, Amadeo Ortiz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McDonald v. Director, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation
as 3:2008cv05488
Petitioner:
Ava L. McDonald
Respondent:
Director, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
