Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Smith v. State of South Carolina
as 8:2023cv04820
Petitioner:
Robert Davis Smith, Jr and Robert David Smith, Jr.
Respondent:
State of South Carolina and Warden of Tyger River Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pendarvis v. Wilson et al
as 2:2022cv03142
Plaintiff:
John Trenton Pendarvis
Defendant:
Alan M. Wilson, Mark A. Keel, Hugh E. Weathers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Smith v. Jewell et al
as 4:2022cv01367
Plaintiff:
Thomas James Smith, Jr.
Defendant:
Doctor Jewell, Nurse Cannon, Chief Rodney Hope and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Smith v. Demory et al
as 9:2021cv02915
Plaintiff:
Shannon Maurice Smith, Jr.
Defendant:
Director Randy Demory and Kristi Schuler
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Booth v. McMaster et al
as 0:2021cv01466
Defendant:
James Lucas, Bryan P. Stirling, G. Murrell Smith jr. and others
Plaintiff:
Joseph Thomas Booth
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pittman v. McMasters et al
as 6:2021cv01056
Plaintiff:
Christopher Frank Pittman, Kristen Pittman and Chris Pittman
Defendant:
Henry McMasters, James Lucas, G Murrell Smith, Jr and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Demory et al
as 9:2019cv01771
Defendant:
Ms Schuller, Captain K Jacumin, Captain Phyall and others
Plaintiff:
Shannon Maurice Smith, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Charleston County et al
as 9:2019cv00967
Defendant:
Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center, Charleston County, Cpt. Carter and others
Plaintiff:
Shannon Maurice Smith, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Forrester et al
as 4:2018cv03317
Plaintiff:
Calvin Smith, Jr.
Defendant:
Mr. Forrester, Mr. Puritis and Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Bush
as 8:2017cv02775
Petitioner:
Robert Davis Smith, Jr
Respondent:
Warden Bush
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
