Cases 41 - 50 of 397
Bray v. Christian et al
as 6:2022cv00370
Plaintiff:
Jeromy D. Bray
Defendant:
John Christian and City Tele Coin Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Manning v. Core Civic et al
as 4:2022cv00540
Plaintiff:
Reco D Manning
Defendant:
Core Civic, Cimarron Correctional Facility, Kimberly Sullivan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hall v. Bridges
as 4:2022cv00524
Petitioner:
Larry D Hall
Respondent:
Scott Crow and Carrie Bridges
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Payne v. Crow
as 4:2022cv00472
Petitioner:
Kerry O Payne
Respondent:
Scott D Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
White v. Dowling et al
as 4:2022cv00449
Plaintiff:
Rickey White
Defendant:
Janet Dowling, Amy Vann, Officer D Hubbard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Craft v. State Farm Insurance Agency et al
as 5:2022cv00840
Plaintiff:
Louis D Craft, Jr. and Louis Douglas Craft, Jr
Defendant:
State Farm Insurance Agency, Stephanie M Collins and David Collins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Taylor v. Rankins
as 6:2022cv00242
Petitioner:
Alan Stuart Taylor
Respondent:
Chris Rankins and Scott D. Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Crow
as 6:2022cv00218
Petitioner:
Leslie Kevin Johnson
Respondent:
D.C. Cole and Scott D. Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis v. Crow
as 4:2022cv00279
Petitioner:
Shiron D Davis
Respondent:
Scott Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Phillips v. Crow
as 6:2022cv00175
Petitioner:
Thomas Raymond Phillips, III
Respondent:
United States of America and Scott D. Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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.
