Cases 41 - 49 of 49
Reynolds v. Davis, Director, TDCJ-CID
as 3:2017cv00299
Respondent:
Brian Collier-TDCJ Executive Director and Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner:
Thomas Kirk Reynolds
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Reynolds v. Davis, Director, TDCJ-CID
as 3:2017cv00300
Respondent:
Brian Collier-TDCJ Executive Director
Defendant:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Petitioner:
Thomas Kirk Reynolds
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas v. State of Texas et al
as 4:2017cv00596
Petitioner:
Darryon M Thomas
Respondent:
State of Texas and Brian Collier-TDCJ Executive Director
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Reynolds v. Collier-TDCJ Executive Director
as 5:2017cv00168
Petitioner:
Thomas Kirk Reynolds
Respondent:
Brian Collier-TDCJ Executive Director
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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
Joshua Wren v. Jimmy Curtis, et al
as 16-11710
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSHUA WREN
Defendant - Appellee:
OFFICER JIMMY CURTIS, OFFICER NFN MENDEZ, OFFICER NFN PRADO and others
Wren v. Curtis et al
as 1:2016cv00196
Plaintiff:
Joshua Wren
Defendant:
Jimmy Curtis, NFN Mendez, NFN Prado and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wren v. Curtis et al
as 3:2016cv03118
Plaintiff:
Joshua Wren
Defendant:
Jimmy Curtis, NFN Mendez, NFN Prado and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tarvin v. TX Bd of Cr Justice, et al
as 08-50026
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FLOYD P TARVIN, IV
Defendant - Appellee:
TEXAS BOARD OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, BRAD LIVINGSTON, Texas Department of Criminal Justice Executive Director, in His Official Capacity, JANIE COCKRELL, TDCJ Executive Director, in her Official Capacity and others
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.
