Cases 1 - 10 of 1,183,246
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv21661
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0551 Administrative Procedure Act
LEIGH v. HANCOCK STATE PRISON WARDEN
as 5:2024cv00130
Plaintiff:
TREMAINE DESHUN LEIGH
Defendant:
HANCOCK STATE PRISON WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 6:2024cv00159
Petitioner:
Darryl Glenn Davis
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kahoe v. Heemans et al
as 3:2024cv00334
Plaintiff:
Lonnie J. Kahoe, Sr.
Defendant:
Karen Heemans and Justin Woods
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Battle v. Alabama, State of
as 2:2024cv00540
Petitioner:
Antonio Dentray Battle
Respondent:
Alabama, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rice v. USA
as 4:2024cv00383
Petitioner:
Antonio Lamont Rice
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Alvarez-Real v. Payne
as 4:2024cv00381
Plaintiff:
Victor Hugo Alvarez-Real
Defendant:
Dexter Payne
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dale v. Stephens et al
as 2:2024cv02053
Plaintiff:
Jason Dale
Defendant:
Former Sheriff Jimmy Stephens, Sheriff Tom Hughes, Jail Administrator Jacob Schook and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Paschel v. Martin et al
as 4:2024cv04034
Plaintiff:
Gregory Paschel
Defendant:
Sheriff Leroy Martin, Jail Administrator Gean Sieger and Chief Deputy Jerry Maness
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hill v. Medical Staff from Program 1 et al
as 4:2024cv02579
Plaintiff:
Cymeyon V. Hill
Defendant:
Medical Staff from Program 1, Monique and Jenny Clay
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
