Cases 31 - 40 of 61
Davis v. USA
as 5:2013cv00116
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
William Thomas Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Carr, Sr. v. Noble et al
as 2:2013cv00762
Plaintiff:
James M. Carr, Sr.
Defendant:
Jeff Noble, Decarlo M. Blackwell, Steve Cahill and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas Davis v. Attorney General of Maryland
as 13-7222
Petitioner - Appellant:
THOMAS DAVIS, a/k/a Thomas Edwards
Respondent - Appellee:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND and BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden
Respondent:
JOHN ROWLEY
BANKS v. DAVY et al
as 1:2012mc00647
Petitioner:
LARRY M. BANKS
Respondent:
THOMAS DAVY and THOMAS DART
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Densmore v. Snohomish County et al
as 2:2012cv01444
Plaintiff:
James Michael Densmore
Defendant:
Snohomish County , Snohomish County Sheriff's Office , Thomas Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brannon v. Allums et al (INMATE 1)
as 1:2012cv00633
Plaintiff:
Richard Allen Brannon
Defendant:
Clark Allums, Robert Cole, Jon Givens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. County of Allegheny, et al
as 12-1571
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS DAVIS
Defendant - Appellee:
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY, and its Agencies, DISTRICT ATTORNEY ALLEGHENY COUNTY and OFFICE OF PUBLIC DEFENDER ALLEGHENY COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA
Heggem v. Snohomish County Corrections et al
as 2:2012cv00242
Plaintiff:
Larry Gene Heggem
Defendant:
Snohomish County Corrections, John Lovick, Thomas Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DAVIS v. THOMPSON
as 2:2012cv00061
Petitioner:
THOMAS DAVIS
Respondent:
BRIAN THOMPSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Davis v. Bannister et al
as 3:2011cv00536
Defendant:
Robert B. Bannister, William Donnelly, David Mar and others
Plaintiff:
Thomas Davis
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.
