Cases 51 - 60 of 20,775
Castro v. Wallace
as 24-50379
Plaintiff:
Hubert Edward Castro
Defendant:
Warden Darren Wallace, TDCJ Hughes Unit, in his Individual and Official Capacity, Assistant Warden Toby Powell, TDCJ Hughes Unit, in his Individual and Official Capacity, Chimdi Akwitti and others
Allen v. Desmut et al
as 4:2024cv00431
Plaintiff:
Michael Edward Allen
Defendant:
Desmut, Restler and Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Edwards v. Bradley
as 5:2024cv00093
Plaintiff:
Kareem M. Edwards
Defendant:
Warden David Bradley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Anderson v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 6:2024cv00034
Petitioner:
Travis Edward Anderson
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Choate v. Kings County Superior Court et al
as 1:2024cv00570
Plaintiff:
George Graham Choate
Defendant:
Kings County Superior Court and Fandy Edwards
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JOHNSON v. USA
as 1:2024cv00401
Petitioner:
RUSSELL EDWARD JOHNSON
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Lee v. Borla
as 3:2024cv02811
Petitioner:
Webster Lee
Respondent:
Warden Edward Borla
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bennett v. Lander et al
as 6:2024cv06296
Plaintiff:
Joshua Bennett
Defendant:
Officer Lander, Officer Ferguson, Officer McClellan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Miller v. Locklear et al
as 5:2024ct03110
Plaintiff:
Michael Edward Miller
Defendant:
Superintendent Locklear, Nurse P. Pierre, OIC of Seg. Unit and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Edward Sartoris v. Haidle, et al
as 24-1871
Plaintiff:
EDWARD SARTORIS
Defendant:
WARDEN HAIDLE, SGT. ZITO, Correctional Officer and DEPUTY WARDEN MCCOY
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.
