Cases 31 - 40 of 177
Bennett v. Emmons et al
as 4:2023cv00051
Plaintiff:
Danny Ray Bennett
Defendant:
Warden Shawn Emmons, Staff Security and Georgia Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bennett v. Tullis et al
as 4:2023cv00015
Plaintiff:
Danny Ray Bennett
Defendant:
Lt. C. Tullis, Swinford, G. Bardy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brown v. Emmons et al
as 4:2023cv00027
Plaintiff:
Antonio Deunta Brown
Defendant:
Shawn Emmons, Hays State Prison Medical Staff Associations, Ronald Barnes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Grantham v. Hammock-Evans et al
as 4:2023cv00020
Plaintiff:
Bryan Lee Grantham
Defendant:
Alicia Hammock-Evans and Shawn Emmons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Horton v. Emmons
as 6:2023cv00013
Petitioner:
Quentin Lee Horton
Respondent:
Shawn Emmons
Not Classified By Court:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Horton v. Emmons
as 4:2023cv00003
Petitioner:
Quentin Lee Horton
Respondent:
Shawn Emmons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brown v. Emmons et al
as 4:2022cv00270
Plaintiff:
Antonio Deunta Brown
Defendant:
Shawn Emmons, Bill Reinhardt and Sandra Guest
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rife v. Emmons et al
as 4:2023cv00004
Plaintiff:
William Rife
Defendant:
Shawn Emmons, Christopher Carr, Timothy C. Ward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shaw v. Ward et al
as 4:2022cv00254
Plaintiff:
Dexter Shaw
Defendant:
Timothy Ward, Robert Toole, Cedric Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MCCOVEY v. EMMONS et al
as 7:2022cv00119
Plaintiff:
TERRY MCCOVEY
Defendant:
WARDEN SHAWN EMMONS, RALPH SHROPSHIRE, AARON PINERO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
