Cases 1 - 10 of 125
Stanwyck v. City of Rhome et al
as 4:2024cv00346
Plaintiff:
Marc Stanwyck
Defendant:
City of Rhome, Eric Debus, Carvan Atkins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Conley v. Dennard et al
as 1:2024cv00402
Plaintiff:
Natalie Conley
Defendant:
Brad Dennard, Michael DeWyre, Patty Trujillo and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Newson v. Douglas et al
as 3:2024cv00098
Plaintiff:
Devoris Newson
Defendant:
Richard D. Douglas, Robert W. Wedemeyer, Camille R. McMullen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Atkins vs USA
as 6:2024cv00081
Plaintiff:
Taitum A Atkins
Defendant:
The United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
Atkins v. United Furniture, et al
as 4:2024cv00625
Defendant:
John Doe, United Furniture Industries, Inc. and Big Lots Stores, LLC
Claimant:
Jerald Atkins
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Tancredi v. Lara et al
as 6:2024cv00085
Plaintiff:
Rosa Tancredi
Defendant:
Maria Lara, Gabriela Prado, Carol Lee Alvarez Prado and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Atkins v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 1:2023cv00192
Petitioner:
John Louis Atkins
Respondent:
Bryan Collier and Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Atkins v. USA
as 1:2023cv00186
Petitioner:
John Louis Atkins
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Atkins v. USA
as 1:2023cv00187
Petitioner:
John Louis Atkins
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Atkins v. Director, TDCJ
as 6:2023cv00447
Petitioner:
John Louis Atkins
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
