Cases 71 - 80 of 3,795
Decker v. Stephens et al
as 4:2016cv02175
Plaintiff:
Kurby G Decker
Defendant:
William Stephens , Blake H Norman , Randall L Parker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Blank v. Williams et al
as 1:2016cv00142
Plaintiff:
David Vern Blank
Defendant:
William Stephens, Pedro Gonzalez, Monte Baker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wilson v. Livingston et al
as 3:2016cv00188
Plaintiff:
Lamont E Wilson
Defendant:
Brad Livingston and William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Debose v. TDCJ Parole Division et al
as 4:2016cv02120
Petitioner:
Leroy Debose
Defendant:
TDCJ Parole Division, William Stephens, Stewart Jenkins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Modisett v. Davis
as 1:2016cv00853
Respondent:
Lorie Davis and William Stephens
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Petitioner:
Raymond Modisett
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sarkozy v. Stephens
as 4:2016cv02028
Plaintiff:
Romero Sarkozy
Defendant:
William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rangamar v. Davis, Director TDCJ-CID
as 6:2016cv00269
Respondent:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID, Sgt. Donna Kazmierczak and William Stephens, Director TDCJ-CID
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Petitioner:
Brandon Mark Mangarero Rangamar
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Birdwell v. Stephens
as 6:2016cv00268
Petitioner:
Vaughn Birdwell
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Respondent:
William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Heng v. Stephens
as 4:2016cv02003
Petitioner:
Syna John Heng
Respondent:
William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Eppelsheimer v. Stephens-Director TDCJ-CID
as 3:2016cv01901
Petitioner:
Thomas Joseph Eppelsheimer
Respondent:
William Stephens-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
