Cases 41 - 50 of 505
Graham v. Williams
as 5:2023cv00399
Plaintiff:
Chandra Graham
Defendant:
Stephanie Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Graham v. Williams
as 5:2023cv00405
Plaintiff:
Chandra Graham
Defendant:
Misty Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Graham v. Stitt et al
as 5:2023cv00381
Plaintiff:
Chandra Graham
Defendant:
Kevin Stitt, Michelle Henderson, James Paul Lankford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gage v. Grantham et al
as 5:2023cv00375
Plaintiff:
Denton William Gage
Defendant:
Ryan James Grantham and FNU LNU
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Prestel v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2023cv00141
Plaintiff:
Anthony Dean Prestel
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, County of Mcintosh, Kevin Ledbetter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Leddy v. Oklahoma County Criminal Justice Authority et al
as 5:2023cv00295
Plaintiff:
Angela Leddy
Defendant:
Oklahoma County Criminal Justice Authority, Board Of County Commissioners for Oklahoma County, Turn Key Health Clinics LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Williams v. Lawton City of et al
as 5:2023cv00284
Plaintiff:
Kent Williams
Defendant:
Lawton City of, James Smith, Terry Sellers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Williams v. Crow et al
as 5:2023cv00270
Petitioner:
Deveyon Edreace Williams
Respondent:
Scott Crow and Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Prestel v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2023cv00098
Plaintiff:
Anthony Dean Prestel
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, County of Mcintosh, Kevin Ledbetter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Harpe
as 5:2023cv00147
Petitioner:
Cody Grant Williams
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
