Cases 11 - 20 of 33
Darrell Harper v. TDCJ, et al
as 16-41065
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARRELL J. HARPER
Defendant - Appellee:
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, KEITH E. GORSUCH, KEVIN B. SMITH and others
Harper v. Gorsuch et al
as 1:2016cv00864
Defendant:
Keith E. Gorsuch, Kimberly R. Malak, Virginia A. McMillian and others
Plaintiff:
Darrell J. Harper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harper v. Gorsuch et al
as 6:2016cv01014
Plaintiff:
Darrell J Harper
Defendant:
Keith E Gorsuch, Charles Landis, Kevin B Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harper v. Davis et al
as 6:2016cv00969
Plaintiff:
Darrell J Harper
Defendant:
Lorie Davis, Kevin B Smith, Robert K Jefferis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harper v. TDCJ et al
as 6:2016cv00507
Plaintiff:
Darrell J Harper
Defendant:
TDCJ, Keith E Gorsuch, Kevin B Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harper v. State of Texas Department of Criminal Justice et al
as 1:2016cv00587
Defendant:
Keith E. Gorsuch and State of Texas Department of Criminal Justice
Plaintiff:
Darrell J. Harper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Flores v. Summerville et al
as 4:2016cv00931
Plaintiff:
Richard Edwin Flores
Defendant:
Dwight D. Summerville, Tallan R. Metcalf, Elizabeth C. Hammons and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harper v. Roesler et al
as 6:2016cv00269
Plaintiff:
Darrell J Harper
Defendant:
Michael A Roesler, Keith E Gorsuch and Charles H Landis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lacy v. Livingston et al
as 4:2015cv03186
Plaintiff:
Antonio M. Lacy
Defendant:
Brad Livingston, Mitchael A. Roesler, Charles Landis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Booth v. Livingston et al
as 4:2014cv03670
Plaintiff:
Stephen Booth
Defendant:
All Similarly Situated Persons, Brad Livingston, Rick Thaler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
