Cases 1 - 10 of 6,123
Ford #181879 v. Morrison et al
as 1:2024cv00459
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Ford #181879
Defendant:
Bryan Morrison, Heidi Washington and Christine Bolden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Zimmerman v. Thomas et al
as 2:2024cv00088
Plaintiff:
Matthew Ivan Zimmerman
Defendant:
Sheriff Bryan Thomas, Chaplain Richard Ashford, Chief FNU Giles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hernandez v. Kylm
as 2:2024cv00138
Plaintiff:
Bryan Paul Hernandez
Defendant:
Arthur D Kylm
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ramon Caldwell v. Bryan Morrison
as 24-1376
Petitioner:
RAMON CALDWELL
Respondent:
BRYAN MORRISON, Warden
Baughman v. Bowman
as 24-40286
Plaintiff:
Steven Kurt Baughman
Defendant:
Jimmy Bowman, Warden, Powledge Unit, Vernon Mitchel, Assitant Warden, Powledge Unit, Ronnie Stanhope, Lieutenant, Powledge Unit and others
White v. Stirling
as 0:2024cv02595
Petitioner:
Gary A. White, Jr.
Respondent:
Bryan Stirling
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
B.J.P. v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
as 24-6388
Plaintiff:
B.J.P.
Defendant:
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, (SCDC), By and Through Its Director, Bryan P. Stirling, SCDC DIRECTOR BRYAN P. STIRLING, in his Individual and Official Capacities, SCDC DEP. DIR. DENNIS PATTERSON, in his Individual and Official Capacities and others
Williams v. Gauna
as 24-40278
Plaintiff:
Jemadari Chinua Williams
Defendant:
Joel Gauna, Region IV Director, TDCJ, Bryan Collier, Executive Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, FNU Hall and others
Adams v. Stirling
as 0:2024cv02603
Plaintiff:
Kent Adams
Defendant:
Bryan P. Stirling
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Jackson v. Collier
as 4:2024cv01595
Plaintiff:
Roy Wayne Jackson, Jr.
Defendant:
Bryan Collier
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.
