Cases 1 - 10 of 5,716
Roman Monzon v. Sherrie Hatch
as 24-6412
Plaintiff:
ROMAN SEBASTIAN MONZON
Defendant:
SHERRIE HATCH, KAY GARVEY, CARRIE TAYLOR and others
McCoy v. Jung
as 8:2024cv01035
Plaintiff:
Quinton McCoy
Defendant:
William Frederic Jung
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hueston v. Brown et al
as 5:2024cv00081
Petitioner:
David E. Hueston
Respondent:
R. Brown and Dr. McCoy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00234
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
McCoy v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 3:2024cv00985
Petitioner:
James McCoy
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kasyjanski v. Allyene et al
as 1:2024cv02278
Plaintiff:
Keith Edward Kasyjanski
Defendant:
Jennifer Allyene, Kelly Lotnard, Nicole Chimenti and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
McCoy v. Womack
as 24-40261
Plaintiff:
James McCoy
Defendant:
Jacquelyn Womack, Senior Practice Manager/Med Complaint, V. Briones, Administrative Associate/Practice Manager and Tara Owens, Registered Nurse Mid-Level Provider
Drever Atelier Angel Borrower, LLC v. S. McCoy Group LLC et al
as 6:2024cv03113
Plaintiff:
DREVER ATELIER ANGEL BORROWER, LLC
Defendant:
S. MCCOY GROUP LLC and MIDWEST GC LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jones v. Payne et al
as 4:2024cv00345
Plaintiff:
Keithen L Jones
Defendant:
Dexter Payne, Dale Reed, Raymond Naylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. KLINEFELTER et al
as 3:2024cv00081
Plaintiff:
DASHAAN R. SMITH
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT KLINEFELTER, SGT. SIPES, SGT. VERESHACK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr 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.
