Cases 61 - 70 of 277
In Re: Virginia Department of Corrections
as 3:2017mc00002
Petitioner:
Virginia Department of Corrections
Plaintiff:
Richard Jordan and Ricky Chase
Intervenor:
Thomas Edwin Loden, Jr.
Defendant:
Marshall L. Fisher , Earnest Lee , Mississippi State Executioner and others
Intervenor_plaintiff:
Roger Thorson and Robert Simon
Cause Of Action: Motion to Quash
Foxx v. Page et al
as 4:2017cv00021
Plaintiff:
Carlos D. Foxx
Defendant:
Jermy Page, Keryi Terry, M. Mays and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harris v. Lee et al
as 4:2016cv00243
Plaintiff:
Tracy Harris
Defendant:
Earnest Lee, Marshall Fisher, Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gregory Randolph v. Powercomm Construction, Inc.
as 16-2370
Plaintiff - Appellee:
GREGORY RANDOLPH, on his own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, DANA BROWN, TWANDA BANISTER and others
Plaintiff:
VAN EUBANKS, DAVID PETERSON, JACQUELINE RIDLEY and others
Defendant - Appellant:
POWERCOMM CONSTRUCTION, INC. and DAVID KWASNIK, SR.
Fairley v. Fisher et al
as 2:2016cv00208
Plaintiff:
Otis Fairley
Defendant:
Marshall Fisher and Earnest Lee
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Wadley v. Lee
as 4:2016cv00217
Petitioner:
Adriel Wadley
Respondent:
Earnest Lee
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Sam Wallace v. Earnest Lee
as 16-60695
Petitioner - Appellant:
SAM WEBSTER WALLACE
Respondent - Appellee:
EARNEST LEE, Superintendent, Mississippi State Penitentiary
Harris v. Lee et al
as 4:2016cv00207
Petitioner:
Mario Harris
Respondent:
Earnest Lee and Attorney General of the State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Gibbs v. Lee et al
as 4:2016cv00205
Plaintiff:
Henry Gibbs, Jr.
Defendant:
Earnest Lee, Willie Knighten and County of Sunflower
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fairley v. Fisher et al
as 4:2016cv00193
Petitioner:
Otis Fairley
Respondent:
Marshall Fisher and Earnest Lee
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
