Cases 1 - 10 of 182
McCoy, III v. Miller et al
as 6:2024cv00187
Plaintiff:
Jimmie McCoy, III
Defendant:
Michael Miller, Jerome Ferguson, S. Vance and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hopper v. County of Tulsa et al
as 4:2024cv00048
Plaintiff:
Keith-Dewane Hopper
Defendant:
County of Tulsa, Vic Regalado, S Holloway and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hanson v. Davis
as 5:2024cv00102
Petitioner:
Michael S. Hanson
Respondent:
Kelli Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Washington v. Public Defenders Office, et al.
as 4:2023cv00561
Defendant:
Jermaine T S Washington, Public Defenders Office, Tulsa Police Department and others
Plaintiff:
Jermaine TS Washington
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hanson v. Davis
as 6:2023cv00414
Petitioner:
Michael S. Hanson
Respondent:
Kelli Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
David v. Hodges et al
as 6:2023cv00405
Defendant:
Angela Cacey, FNU Fisk, Dustin Hodges and others
Plaintiff:
Jerome Adrian David
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Spensley v. Kuhlman et al
as 5:2023cv00279
Plaintiff:
Douglas H Spensley
Defendant:
Johnny L Kuhlman, John & Jane Doe(s) and Ronald L Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Burchett v. Bates
as 6:2023cv00085
Petitioner:
Eugene S. Burchett
Respondent:
Tom Bates
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ray v. Norwood
as 6:2023cv00067
Petitioner:
Eric S. Ray
Respondent:
Joseph Norwood
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sweet et al v. Dean et al
as 4:2022cv00442
Plaintiff:
Alexander Nicholaus Sweet and Morgan L Caldwell
Defendant:
Brian S Dean and Douglas E Snow
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
