Cases 11 - 20 of 20
Richardson v. Correction Corporation of America et al
as 3:2014mc00648
Plaintiff:
Steve Richardson
Defendant:
Correction Corporation of America, (f/n/u) Jackson, (f/n/u) Bridges and others
Bryant et al v. Jackson et al
as 1:2012cv00093
Plaintiff:
Waford Bryant, Larry Guina and Corbell Baughn
Defendant:
f/n/u Jackson, f/n/u Trafton, f/n/u Pope and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Howard v. State of Tennessee Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2012cv00004
Plaintiff:
Eric Bernard Howard
Defendant:
State of Tennessee Department of Corrections, Derrick Schofield, Reuben V. Hodges and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hurley v. Aybair et al
as 1:2010cv00079
Plaintiff:
Terry Lynn Hurley
Defendant:
(f/n/u) Aybair, (f/n/u) Jackson and (f/n/u) Roslyn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hurley v. Aybair et al
as 1:2010mc00012
Plaintiff:
Terry Lynn Hurley
Defendant:
(f/n/u) Aybair, (f/n/u) Jackson and (f/n/u) Roslyn
Williams v. Davidson County Sheriff Office et al
as 3:2009cv00942
Plaintiff:
Willie S. Williams
Defendant:
Davidson County Sheriff Office, Correct Care Solutions, Dean Rieger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Guerra v. Bement et al
as 5:2009cv00784
Plaintiff:
Roberto Luis Guerra
Defendant:
B. Bement, G. Rodriguez, F/N/U Procter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Litchford v. Hall et al
as 3:2007cv01029
Plaintiff:
Kenneth D. Litchford, Sr.
Defendant:
Darren Hall, Davidson County Sheriff Department and (f/n/u) Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Litchford v. Hall et al
as 3:2007mc00077
Plaintiff:
Kenneth D. Litchford, Sr.
Defendant:
Darren Hall, Davidson County Sheriff Department and (f/n/u) Jackson
Lomax v. Dickson County Jail et al
as 3:2007mc00011
Plaintiff:
Jerry Lomax
Defendant:
Dickson County Jail, (f/n/u) Lane, f/n/u Farvel and others
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.
