Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Jones v. Lumpkin
as 23-40612
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Ricky Clay Jones
Defendant / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, H. M. Pederson and S. Sanchez, Assistant Regional Director
Jones v. McComas et al
as 1:2023cv00215
Plaintiff:
Joseph Clayton Jones and Clay Jones
Defendant:
Joseph McComas and Rutherford County Sheriffs Office
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Lumpkin et al
as 2:2023cv00152
Plaintiff:
Ricky Clay Jones
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, H.M. Pederson and S. Sanchez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Lumpkin et al
as 5:2023cv00084
Plaintiff:
Ricky Clay Jones
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, H.M. Pederson and S. Sanchez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ricky Clay Jones v. Bobby Lumpkin
as 5:2022cv01014
Petitioner:
Ricky Clay Jones
Respondent:
Bryan Collier - TDCJ Director and Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Lumpkin
as 1:2022cv00119
Petitioner:
Ricky Clay Jones
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin and Director Bryan Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2021cv00062
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JONES v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv07802
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM CLAY JONES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BAKER v. JONES et al
as 1:2019cv00210
Defendant:
Lieutenant WAKEFIELD, Sergeant WRIGHT, Sergeant THOMAS and others
Plaintiff:
AVERY DANIELLE BAKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BAKER v. JONES et al
as 4:2019cv00193
Defendant:
Lieutenant WAKEFIELD, Sergeant WRIGHT, Sergeant THOMAS and others
Plaintiff:
AVERY DANIELLE BAKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
