Cases 1 - 10 of 69
Johnson v. Warden S. Jansen et al
as 9:2023cv02537
Plaintiff:
Anthony D. Johnson
Defendant:
Warden S. Jansen, Warden Phelps, L. Newcombe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, Federal Filers (Bivens)
Martin v. Johnson et al
as 4:2022cv00552
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Lee Martin, Jr.
Defendant:
Warden Sean Johnson, Assistant Warden Mallissa Kimberley, Stephanie Lanham and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, Federal Filers (Bivens)
Lopez v. Stirling et al
as 9:2022cv00250
Plaintiff:
Daniel Lopez
Defendant:
Bryan P. Stirling and Alan Wilson
Respondent:
Warden of Tyger River Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Asmer v. Blocker et al
as 4:2021cv02817
Plaintiff:
Charles Anthony Asmer
Defendant:
Rex Blocker, Ms. Battle-Walton, H. Lopez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Edwin v. Stirling et al
as 8:2021cv01537
Defendant:
Emily Anderson, Michael McCall, Sam Ray and others
Plaintiff:
Hakeem Edwin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Smith v. Stirling et al
as 8:2021cv01538
Defendant:
Sam Ray, Michael McCall, Emily Anderson and others
Plaintiff:
Victor Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Jenkins v. Stirling et al
as 8:2021cv01107
Defendant:
Sam Ray, Uniqueqa James, Michael McCall and others
Plaintiff:
Joseph Jenkins and Deloris Jenkins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Woodruff v. Stirling et al
as 8:2021cv01108
Defendant:
Sam Ray, Marquita McCullough, Uniqueqa James and others
Plaintiff:
Tyrus Woodruff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shaw v. Stirling et al
as 8:2021cv01105
Defendant:
Sam Ray, Marquita McCullough, Uniqueqa James and others
Plaintiff:
Deanna Shaw
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rogers v. Stirling et al
as 8:2021cv01106
Defendant:
Sam Ray, Marquita McCullough, Uniqueqa James and others
Plaintiff:
Shadrian Rogers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
