Cases 41 - 50 of 2,619
Jason Miles v. Michelle Floyd
as 24-1096
Petitioner:
JASON MICHAEL MILES
Respondent:
MICHELLE FLOYD, Warden
SATTERFIELD v. THOMAS et al
as 2:2024cv00484
Plaintiff:
RASSOUL PAUL SATTERFIELD
Defendant:
DETECTIVE WILLIAM THOMAS, DETECTIVE FLOYD GALLO, ASSISTANT DISTRICT SANDY BYRD and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Hudson v. Bonner
as 2:2024cv02072
Petitioner:
Melvin Hudson
Respondent:
Floyd Bonner, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lowe v. State of California et al
as 5:2024cv00490
Plaintiff:
Floyd Lowe
Defendant:
State of California, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), San Quentin State Prison and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Byrd et al v. Bonner et al
as 2:2024cv02043
Plaintiff:
Laquita Byrd and Marcus Byrd
Defendant:
Floyd Bonner, Kirk Fields and Shelby County Government
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Garcia (ID 6002627) v. Dietrich et al
as 5:2024cv03010
Plaintiff:
Ray Floyd Garcia, Jr.
Defendant:
Brenda Dietrich, David Haley, Carolyn McGinn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Garcia (ID 6002627) v. Centurion et al
as 5:2024cv03008
Plaintiff:
Ray Floyd Garcia, Jr.
Defendant:
Centurion and Lindzie R. Mendoza
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nolan Floyd, Sr. v. D.O.C. Commissioner
as 24-6028
Plaintiff:
NOLAN KINARD FLOYD, SR.
Defendant:
D.O.C. COMMISSIONER, ANNIE HARVEY, Commissioner and CLEVELAND FRIDAY
Rickey Benson v. Floyd Bonner, Jr.
as 24-5043
Petitioner:
RICKEY BENSON
Respondent:
FLOYD BONNER, JR., Sheriff
Nolan Floyd, Sr. v. Fredrick Abello
as 24-6003
Plaintiff:
NOLAN KINARD FLOYD, SR.
Defendant:
WARDEN FREDRICK ABELLO, CHIEF OF SECURITY TYRELL WILSON and CORPORAL HUMPHREY ADUSEI
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.
