Cases 41 - 50 of 455
Carter v. Detaining Officers of Incident et al
as 5:2023cv01250
Plaintiff:
Ellery Carter
Defendant:
Detaining Officers of Incident, Owner/Leaser of 139 Bonanza 78237, The Person that made the 911 call and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mason v. American Security Insurance Company
as 4:2023cv02724
Plaintiff:
Thomas Mason
Defendant:
American Security Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Rios v. Mason
as 5:2023cv00157
Petitioner:
John Gabriel Rios
Respondent:
Wanda Mason
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mason v. State of Texas
as 3:2023cv01636
Petitioner:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Respondent:
State of Texas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mason v. TDCJ Agencies
as 2:2023cv00128
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
TDCJ Agencies
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mason v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 2:2023cv00111
Petitioner:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00618
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Mason v. Smith et al
as 2:2023cv00093
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
Kevin Smith, Jimmy Smith, Bryan Reitsma and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00579
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
RLI Insurance Company v. Courtney et al
as 6:2023cv00207
Plaintiff:
RLI Insurance Company
Defendant:
Mason Courtney, Karl "Shane" Courtney and Daphne Courtney
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
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.
