Cases 71 - 80 of 792
Rosales Fuentes v. Jones, et al.
as 3:2019cv00867
Defendant:
Lt. J. Ragans, Lt. Linbrin, Captain Power and others
Plaintiff:
Yoandris Rosales Fuentes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McLeod v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2019cv23051
Defendant:
Centurion of Florida, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, ARNP Chatelier-Dreus and others
Plaintiff:
Steven A. McLeod
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
POWELL v. JONES et al
as 4:2019cv00326
Defendant:
J BURGOS-POLO, B EDOURD, CORIZON LLC and others
Plaintiff:
EDDIE POWELL, SR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCLEOD v. JONES et al
as 4:2019cv00324
Plaintiff:
STEVEN A MCLEOD
Defendant:
MICHAEL D CREWS, CORIZON HEALTH, CHATELIER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harlan v. Franco et al
as 1:2019cv00619
Defendant:
Julie Jones, New Mexico Corrections Department and German Franco
Plaintiff:
Deandre Harlan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
GREEN v. FLA COMMISSION OF OFFENDER REVIEW et al
as 4:2019cv00291
Respondent:
CYNTHIA ZIMMERMAN, ANDRE THORNTON, FLA COMMISSION OF OFFENDER REVIEW and others
Petitioner:
FELTON BERNARD GREEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Saenz v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al
as 5:2019cv00646
Plaintiff:
Julie Jones Saenz
Defendant:
Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC, Individually and d/b/a Walmart Store #5146, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Pepsico, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
BROOKS v. INCH
as 3:2019cv01662
Petitioner:
DONALD BROOKS
Respondent:
JULIE JONES
Defendant:
MARK S INCH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BROOKS v. INCH
as 3:2019cv01673
Petitioner:
DONALD BROOKS
Respondent:
JULIE JONES and MARK S INCH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Forney v. Jones et al
as 3:2019cv00692
Plaintiff:
James M Forney, Michael R. Molina and J. Michael Forney
Defendant:
Shannon Jernigan, Mark Inch, Marshall Herring and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
