Cases 1 - 10 of 32
Butler v. Day
as 6:2024cv00022
Petitioner:
Robey Lee Butler
Defendant:
Jail Administrator Jeremy Day
Respondent:
Jeremy Day
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Butler v. Waters et al
as 6:2024cv00007
Plaintiff:
Robey Lee Butler
Defendant:
Kyle E. Waters, Matthew Orendorff and Stacey Slaughter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Butler v. State of Oklahoma
as 6:2023cv00396
Petitioner:
Joshua Duane Butler
Respondent:
State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Butler v. Ledbetter
as 6:2023cv00433
Petitioner:
Joshua Duane Butler
Respondent:
The State of Oklahoma and Kevin Ledbetter
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Butler v. Bryning et al
as 6:2023cv00369
Plaintiff:
Joshua Duane Butler
Defendant:
David Bryning, Karen Hughes, Mary Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Butler v. Rainbolt
as 6:2023cv00397
Plaintiff:
Joshua Duane Butler
Defendant:
Carmen Rainbolt
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv00536
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Lunsford v. City of Tulsa, Oklahoma et al
as 4:2022cv00347
Plaintiff:
Deana Lunsford and Douglas Rucker
Defendant:
City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, Joshua Hyman, Cody Riley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Rogers v. Taylor et al
as 5:2022cv00325
Plaintiff:
Isom Daniel Rogers, III
Defendant:
P D Taylor, Captain FNU Sedbrook, FNU Sedbrook and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Butler v. Nunn
as 4:2022cv00009
Petitioner:
Floyd E Butler and Floyd Earl Butler
Respondent:
Scott Nunn
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.
