Cases 51 - 60 of 91
James Watson v. Bobby Ephlin, et al
as 16-3263
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Watson
Defendant - Appellee:
Bobby Ephlin, Sgt. Second Judicial District Drug Task Force, Grant Barnett, Sgt. Second Judicial District Drug Task Force, Chris Lassley, Sgt. Second Judicial District Drug Task Force and others
Watson v. Farnham et al
as 2:2016cv02247
Plaintiff:
James Watson
Defendant:
Karl Farnham, Jeff Wood and John Ramsey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Watson v. Farnham et al
as 2:2016cv02241
Plaintiff:
James . Watson
Defendant:
Karl Farnham, Jeff Wood and John Ramsey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WATSON v. USA
as 1:2016cv00831
Petitioner:
EDWARD JAMES WATSON
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Mack v. Erfe et al
as 3:2016cv00894
Plaintiff:
Anthony Mack
Defendant:
Erfe, James Watson, Brian Mazurek and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Watson v. Clark et al
as 1:2016cv00874
Petitioner:
James Watson
Respondent:
Michael Clark, PA State Attorney General and District Attorney of Bradford County
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Watson v. Stephens
as 5:2016cv00090
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Defendant:
William Stephens
Petitioner:
Robert James Watson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kyle #872579 v. Unknown Party #1 et al
as 1:2015cv00712
Plaintiff:
Rodney Dee Kyle #872579, II
Defendant:
Mark Waichum, Jame Watson, Chad Preston and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robert Watson v. John Flores, et al
as 15-50386
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT JAMES WATSON
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN EDDIE FLORES, Supervisor, Guadalupe County Sheriff's Office and KRIS DESLATTE, Investigator, Guadalupe County Sheriff's Office
James Watson v. Osceola Police Department, et al
as 15-1757
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Watson
Defendant - Appellee:
Osceola Police Department, Mississippi County Sheriff's Department and Arkansas Parole Board
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.
