Cases 61 - 70 of 695
Ritter v. Lee County Detention Center (INMATE 1)
as 3:2024cv00067
Plaintiff:
Brian Henry Ritter, Raymond Mitchell Keeton, Courtney Morgan and others
Defendant:
Lee County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Martin v. Neely et al
as 7:2024cv00267
Petitioner:
Candice Cherie Martin
Respondent:
Kimberly Neely and C Peters
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Scales v. O'Malley
as 1:2024cv00191
Plaintiff:
Shane Scales
Defendant:
Martin J. O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Martin v. Lee County Detention Center (INMATE 2)
as 3:2024cv00087
Plaintiff:
Alonzo B. Martin, Jr.
Defendant:
Lee County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Range 231 N., LLC et al
as 2:2024cv00144
Plaintiff:
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.
Defendant:
Range 231 N., LLC doing business as Range 231 N. and Bradley Martin
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 605 Unauthorized publication or use of communications
Moore v. Martin et al
as 5:2024cv00255
Plaintiff:
Jason Everett Moore
Defendant:
Mark Martin, Edward Lewter, Kevin Turner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Henderson v. O'Malley
as 2:2024cv00170
Plaintiff:
Adam Daniel Henderson
Defendant:
Martin J. O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Bass v. O'Malley
as 1:2024cv00155
Plaintiff:
Christine Bass
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley and Martin J. O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Martin v. Calloway (INMATE 3)
as 3:2024cv00153
Plaintiff:
Silas Martin
Defendant:
Rolanda Calloway
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2254 Civil Forfeiture
Sexton v. O'Malley
as 2:2024cv00006
Plaintiff:
Rhonda Sexton
Defendant:
Martin J. O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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.
