Cases 1 - 10 of 97
WOOD v. SELLERS et al
as 5:2020cv00124
Plaintiff:
BRANDON CRAIG WOOD
Defendant:
CHARLES WILLIAMS, SAMUEL ANDREWS, QUINTON RICHARDSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dixon v. Sellers et al
as 1:2019cv04839
Respondent:
Eric Sellers and T. Bobbit
Petitioner:
Jarrett Dixon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
LLOYD v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2019cv00353
Defendant:
JACK RANDALL SAULS, CLAY NIX, RICKY MYRICK and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JOSEPH LLOYD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TREADWELL v. DOZIER et al
as 5:2019cv00235
Plaintiff:
DEANTHONY TREADWELL and DAVID JAMALSON
Defendant:
LT DAVIS, LIEUTENANT RONNIE SHOEMAKER, MCCRAY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MOSS v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2019cv00227
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL MOSS
Defendant:
JACK RANDALL SAULS, TREVONZA BOBBITT, Clay Nix and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DOTSON v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2019cv00225
Defendant:
JACK RANDALL SAULS, TREVONZA BOBBITT, CLAY NIX and others
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY DOTSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GHIDEN v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2019cv00197
Defendant:
JACK RANDY SAULS, CLAY NIX, RICKY MYRICK and others
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY GHIDEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
USMAN v. SELLERS
as 5:2019cv00028
Respondent:
Eric Sellers
Not Yet Classified:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Petitioner:
JORDAN C USMAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
USMAN v. SELLERS
as 2:2019cv00055
Respondent:
Eric Sellers and Timothy C. Ward
Not Yet Classified:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Petitioner:
JORDAN C USMAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WILSON, et al v. SELLERS
as 5:2019cv00118
Plaintiff:
EUGENE WILSON, II, JOHNNIE DURDEN, HASKELL JOHNSON and others
Defendant:
WARDEN SELLERS and WARDEN ERIC SELLERS
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.
