Cases 11 - 20 of 24
Bagby v. Harmon et al
as 5:2014cv00735
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Defendant:
David J. Bradley, Melinda Harmon, B. A. Howell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bagby v. Rosenthal et al
as 5:2014cv00736
Defendant:
Clifton E. Averitte, David J. Bradley, Mary Lou Robinson and others
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bagby v. King et al
as 5:2014cv00682
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Defendant:
Molly C. Dwyer, Chief Judge George H. King, Judge Donna M. Ryu and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bagby v. Fathi
as 4:2013cv00598
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Defendant:
David Fathi, Judge Name Unknown, Lee H Rosenthal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bagby v. Averitte et al
as 4:2013cv00551
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Defendant:
Clinton E Averitte, K.G.B and Mary Lou Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bagby v. Thaler et al
as 2:2013cv00012
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Defendant:
Rick (Rick) Thaler, Sr and Lee H Rosenthal
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bagby v. Thaler et al
as 4:2013cv00093
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Defendant:
Rick (Rick) Thaler, Sr, Vogelsong, Palmer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bagby v. Judge et al
as 4:2012cv03729
Plaintiff:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Defendant:
Judge, Clerk's Office, Clerk's Office U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Bagby v. Thaler
as 4:2012cv03079
Petitioner:
Cedric Wayne Bagby
Respondent:
Rick Thaler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BAGBY v. THALER, Director TDCJ-CID
as 2:2012cv00216
Petitioner:
CEDRIC WAYNE BAGBY
Respondent:
Rick Thaler, Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
