Cases 1 - 10 of 338
Ames et al v. Sexton et al
as 3:2024cv00929
Plaintiff:
Mary Ames and Brianna Triplett
Defendant:
Trina Sexton, Michael Beaton, Tzar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Newson v. Newson et al
as 3:2024cv00107
Plaintiff:
Devoris Newson
Defendant:
Dennis H. Newson, Go 2 Inn Suites and Inspire Apartment, El Paso Sheriff's Office and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dalton v. State of Tennessee et al
as 2:2024cv00007
Plaintiff:
Jeremy James Dalton
Defendant:
State of Tennessee, Fentress County, Shane Sexton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pendleton v. Ames et al
as 2:2024cv00029
Plaintiff:
Ricky Vincent Pendleton
Defendant:
Donnie Ames and William K. Marshall, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Murray v. Ames et al
as 6:2024cv00072
Plaintiff:
Johnny C Murray
Defendant:
Teresa Ames and Michael Morgan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adamson v. Givens et al
as 2:2024cv00014
Plaintiff:
Derrick Adamson
Defendant:
Pam Givens, Shirley Hamrick, Donald Ames and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Andred Davis, Jr. v. Donald Ames
as 23-7291
Plaintiff:
ANDRED CLINTON DAVIS, JR.
Defendant:
DONALD F. AMES, Warden, JASON BRAGG, Unit Manager, RICHARD TONEY, Captain and others
Price v. Ames et al
as 2:2023cv00784
Plaintiff:
Prince A. Price
Defendant:
Donald F. Ames, William K. Marshals and W.V. Divisions Correction Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Arnold McCartney v. Donnie Ames
as 23-7197
Petitioner / Appellant:
ARNOLD WAYNE MCCARTNEY
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent, Mount Olive Correctional Complex and Jail
Raymond Richardson v. Donnie Ames
as 23-7147
Petitioner / Appellant:
RAYMOND ANDREW RICHARDSON
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent
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.
