Cases 1 - 10 of 11
(PC) Dison v. Reaves et al
as 2:2023cv02555
Plaintiff:
Donald Ray Dison Jr. and Donald Ray Dison, Jr
Defendant:
R. Reaves, L. Para, E. Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fontenot v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv03721
Petitioner:
Earnest J Fontenot
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Fontenot v. Louisiana
as 2:2016cv00582
Plaintiff:
Anthony J Fontenot, Jr
Defendant:
State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Patrick Bell v. Fausto Avila, et al
as 15-20536
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PATRICK WAYNE BELL
Defendant - Appellee:
FAUSTO AVILA, Officially and Individually, GWENDOLYN CRAWFORD, Officially and Individually, EUGENE J. FONTENOT, JR., Officially and Individually and others
Wesley v. Leehy et al
as 3:2014cv00483
Plaintiff:
Christopher Wesley
Defendant:
Scott Leehy, James E Ross, Michael J Fontenot and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas Pennington v. Brad Livingston, et al
as 12-20778
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS RAY PENNINGTON
Defendant - Appellee:
BRAD LIVINGSTON, Executive Director, DR. BEN RAIMER, University of Texas Medical Branch Correctional Manager, DR. K. CARPIN and others
Pennington v. Livingston et al
as 4:2012cv00046
Plaintiff:
Thomas Ray Pennington
Defendant:
Brad Livingston, Ben Raimer, K Carpin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bell v. Avila et al
as 4:2011cv04238
Plaintiff:
Patrick Wayne Bell
Defendant:
Fausto Avila, Gwendolyn Crawford, Eugene J Fontenot, Jr and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Earnest Fontenot v. Rick Thaler, Director
as 10-20779
Petitioner - Appellant:
EARNEST J. FONTENOT
Respondent - Appellee:
RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Fontenot v. Quarterman
as 4:2009cv00942
Plaintiff:
Earnest J. Fontenot
Defendant:
Nathaniel Quarterman
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
