Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Foster v. Dixon
as 5:2024cv00192
Plaintiff:
Martin Lee Foster
Defendant:
Christopher Dixon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Foster v. Ramirez et al
as 5:2023cv04837
Plaintiff:
Martin Lee Foster
Defendant:
Marisa Ramirez, Joseph Jimenez, Christopher Dixon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dixon v. Thompson
as 3:2023cv00119
Petitioner:
Christopher Dixon
Respondent:
R. Thompson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Christopher Dixon v. Sherri Fritter, et al
as 22-2507
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER DIXON, also known as CHRISTOPHER LAMONT DIXON
Defendant / Appellee:
SHERRI FRITTER, a Health Services Adminstrator, in her individual capacity and DIANE THEWS, as an Advance Practice Nurse, in her individual capacity
Dixon v. Abbott et al
as 4:2020cv02393
Defendant:
UTMB Health, Governor Greg Abbott, Dir of TDCJ Exec. Di Bryan Collier and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Dixon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dixon v. Wexford Medical et al
as 3:2020cv00155
Defendant:
Denna Laughin, Ronald Neal, Sherri Fritter and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Dixon
Not Classified By Court:
INDIANA STATE PRISON E-FILE (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dixon v. Doe et al
as 9:2019cv00778
Defendant:
Mr. Enser, Nancy Doe, Brad Barnes and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Dixon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dixon v. Larson et al
as 3:2015cv00449
Petitioner:
Byron Christopher Dixon
Respondent:
James Larson and Attorney General of PA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Dixon v. Larson et al
as 3:2015cv00425
Plaintiff:
Byron Christopher Dixon
Defendant:
James Larson, Robert Lawton and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Dixon v. Moore
as 06-3477
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER DIXON
Respondent - Appellee:
ERNIE L. MOORE, Warden
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.
