Cases 21 - 30 of 102,664
Sewell v. Sewell
as 1:2024cv00525
Plaintiff:
Rodney Sewell
Defendant:
Shanna N. Sewell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hamilton v. Beaumont Police Department et al
as 1:2024cv00175
Plaintiff:
Marcus Anthony Hamilton
Defendant:
Beaumont Police Department, Jefferson County Sheriff Department and State of Texas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hamilton v. State of Texas et al
as 1:2024cv00176
Plaintiff:
Marcus Anthony Hamilton
Defendant:
State of Texas, Jefferson County Sheriff Department and Beaumont Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Whitaker v. Boneberg et al
as 3:2024cv01153
Plaintiff:
Jamison Whitaker
Defendant:
Kevin Boneberg, Hope Sumrow, Robert Daniel Freisner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Harris County Sheriff's Officer Reyes
as 4:2024cv01839
Plaintiff:
Scott Smith
Defendant:
Harris County Sheriff's Officer Reyes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. 3 Unknown Inmates et al
as 4:2024cv01841
Plaintiff:
Scott Smith
Defendant:
3 Unknown Inmates, D.O. Herrington and Harris County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. J. Frago et al
as 4:2024cv01840
Plaintiff:
Scott Smith
Defendant:
J. Frago, Officer Harrington and Sargent C. Lee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Polk v. Lumpkin
as 9:2024cv00092
Petitioner:
Mavis Ray Polk
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dingle v. Port Arthur Police Department
as 1:2024cv00174
Plaintiff:
Marthur L Dingle
Defendant:
Port Arthur Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Blake v. Rosalez
as 5:2024cv00498
Petitioner:
Robert Timothy Blake
Respondent:
Warden G. Rosalez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
