Cases 1 - 10 of 77
Gillen v. AT&T Inc.
as 3:2024cv01372
Plaintiff:
Bart Gillen
Defendant:
AT&T Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00035
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
White v. Lusk, et al
as 5:2024cv00018
Defendant:
Anthony Scott White, Michael Lusk, Bart Craytor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Castro v. Lumpkin
as 1:2024cv00062
Petitioner:
Bart Gonzales Castro
Respondent:
The State of Texas and Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mack v. Bowie County Detention Center et al
as 5:2023cv00130
Plaintiff:
Malcolm C Mack
Defendant:
Bowie County Detention Center, Kelly Chris, Judge John L Tidewell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mills v. Tidwell et al
as 5:2023cv00064
Plaintiff:
Jerry J. Mills
Defendant:
Judge Tidwell and Bart C Craytor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Basinski et al v. Keller Williams Realty, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00299
Plaintiff:
Colleen L Basinski, Bart S Basinski and BAZ Investment Group, Inc.
Defendant:
Keller Williams Realty, Inc., Gary Keller, Marc King and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Contract Dispute
Jones v. Tate Rehmet Law Office et al
as 3:2023cv00462
Plaintiff:
Michael Darnell Jones
Defendant:
Tate Rehmet Law Office and J Bart Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Martin v. Live Oak County Jail
as 2:2022cv00260
Plaintiff:
Daniel Neal Martin
Defendant:
Live Oak County Jail, Daniel Coban Barton, Jailer Perry and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Jones v. Tate Rehmet Law Office et al
as 3:2022cv01905
Plaintiff:
Michael D Jones
Defendant:
Tate Rehmet Law Office and J Bart Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
