Cases 31 - 40 of 52
Carr et al v. Tewalt et al
as 1:2021cv00409
Plaintiff:
Jody Carr and Double Celled Close Custody Inmates of IDOC
Defendant:
Director IDOC Josh Tewalt, Chad Page, Amanda Gentry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MacIntosh et al v. Richardson
as 4:2020cv02610
Plaintiff:
Albert Brooks, Angel Ramos, Calvin Brewer and others
Defendant:
Warden Richardson and Director TDCJ Lorie Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Roberts v. Lt. Fuentes et al
as 2:2020cv00093
Defendant:
Lt. Javier Muro, Tanya Lawson, Megan R. Thompson and others
Plaintiff:
Arthur Roberts, II
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ussery v. Warden Richardson et al
as 2:2020cv00135
Plaintiff:
Roy Ussery
Defendant:
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Director for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Warden Richardson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Schorsch v. Miller et al
as 2:2019cv00323
Defendant:
Gene Miller, Asst Warden Daniel Fernandez and Warden Richardson
Plaintiff:
James Schorsch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Curry, Daniel v. Mellenberger et al
as 3:2019cv00775
Plaintiff:
Daniel Curry
Defendant:
Unit Manager Mellenberger and Warden Richardson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Richardson
as 2:2019cv00221
Respondent:
Warden Richardson
Petitioner:
John L Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Mendez v. Officer Adejugbe et al
as 3:2019cv00106
Defendant:
Officer Adejugbe and Warden Richardson
Plaintiff:
Devon Mendez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mendez v. Officer Adejugbe et al Example: Case transferred to Galveston 3-19-cv-106.
as 4:2019cv00891
Defendant:
Officer Adejugbe and Warden Richardson
Plaintiff:
Devon Mendez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tawater v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 3:2018cv02582
Respondent:
Warden Richardson and Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner:
Royce William Tawater
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
