Cases 11 - 20 of 25
Washington v. Mississippi Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2011cv00217
Plaintiff:
Sharon Washington
Defendant:
Mississippi Department of Corrections , Holmes County, MS , Humphreys County, MS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2011cv00040
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
McKenzie v. Horton et al
as 3:2010cv00692
Plaintiff:
Augusta McKenzie
Defendant:
Rayford Horton, Robert Brown, Juanita Mitchell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anderson v. Horton et al
as 4:2010cv00026
Petitioner:
Reginald Anderson
Respondent:
Rayford Horton and Attorney General of the State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Burrough v. Horton et al
as 4:2009cv00117
Petitioner:
Christopher Jason Burrough
Respondent:
Rayford Horton, Christopher Epps and The Attorney General of the State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Belk v. Horton et al
as 1:2009cv00242
Petitioner:
Kentrail Belk
Respondent:
Rayford Horton and The Attorney General of the State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Boyd v. Hayne et al
as 1:2009cv00160
Plaintiff:
Terence O. Boyd
Defendant:
Steven Hayne, Jimmy Simmons, John A. Gregory and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bridges v. Horton
as 2:2008cv00243
Plaintiff:
Dwight Bridges
Defendant:
Rayford Horton
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Seals v. Horton et al
as 3:2008cv00432
Plaintiff:
Richard T. Seals
Defendant:
Rayford E. Horton, Brown, Carter and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Wolfe et al v. Rayford et al
as 2:2008cv00168
Plaintiff:
Billy Wolfe and Rosemary Wolfe
Defendant:
Walter Rayford, M. D. and Southeast Urology Network, P.C.
Cause Of Action: Diversity
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.
