Cases 111 - 120 of 102,590
Edwards v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00899
Petitioner:
Robert C. Edwards
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Robertson v Allen
as 6:2024cv00083
Plaintiff:
Carl W Robertson
Defendant:
Lynn Allen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Whitaker v. Mills
as 3:2024cv01064
Plaintiff:
Jamison Whitaker
Defendant:
Officer Ryan Mills
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davila v. U.S. Department of Justice et al
as 4:2024cv00386
Plaintiff:
Miguel Davila, Jr
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons South Central Regional Office and Office of Management and Budget
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
Lettieri v. Securus Technologies
as 3:2024cv01065
Plaintiff:
David C Lettieri
Defendant:
Securus Technologies
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lacy v. Villalobos et al
as 4:2024cv00896
Plaintiff:
Antonio Maurice Lacy
Defendant:
Assistant Warden Dana Sullivan, Nurse Practitioner Crystal Mable, UTMB and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniels v. Smith County Sheriff
as 6:2024cv00077
Plaintiff:
Randy K. Daniels
Defendant:
Smith County Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Garcia v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 6:2024cv00158
Petitioner:
Antonio Andres Garcia
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00469
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Ashlock v. Coke County et al
as 3:2024cv00959
Plaintiff:
Calvin Lee Ashlock
Defendant:
Coke County, Midland County and Tom Green County Detention Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
