Cases 11 - 20 of 2,847
DUNN v. OLIVER et al
as 5:2024cv00324
Plaintiff:
CLEVELAND DUNN
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER TYRONE OLIVER, DEPUTY WARDEN JEFFREY FARMER, ASST COMMISSIONER RANDY SAULS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MILES v. MACON STATE PRISON
as 5:2024cv00326
Defendant:
WARDEN MACON STATE PRISON
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL NIKIETH MILES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Capehart v. Oliver et al
as 3:2024cv00065
Defendant:
Warden Shawn Gillis, Dr. Neav, J. Randall Sauls and others
Plaintiff:
Randy Lee Capehart
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Whittle v. Thomas et al
as 4:2024cv00223
Defendant:
Patrick Pat Labbot, Office S. Thomas and Warden of Fulton County Jail
Plaintiff:
Israel Whittle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Whittle v. Thomas et al
as 1:2024cv04191
Defendant:
Office S. Thomas, Warden of Fulton County Jail and Patrick Pat Labbot
Plaintiff:
Israel Whittle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Reyes v. Swaney
as 2:2024cv00107
Respondent:
Warden G. Swaney
Petitioner:
Alberto Reyes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
PUGH v. WALKER
as 5:2024cv00321
Defendant:
WARDEN HERBERT WALKER, III
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER LENARD PUGH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
PUGH v. WALKER
as 4:2024cv00128
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER LENARD PUGH
Defendant:
WARDEN HERBERT WALKER, III
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Ayala v. Swaney
as 2:2024cv00106
Petitioner:
Ricardo Ayala
Respondent:
Warden G. Swaney
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Robinson v. Warden Wheeler Correctional Institution
as 1:2024cv04116
Respondent:
Warden Wheeler Correctional Institution
Petitioner:
Carlos Robinson
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.
