Cases 1 - 10 of 24
Young v. Phillips et al
as 3:2024cv00122
Plaintiff:
Charles Young
Defendant:
Amber L. Phillips, John Doe and John Doe #1
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Young v. Rowe et al
as 5:2023cv00190
Plaintiff:
Charles Young
Defendant:
Kelly Rowe, FNU LNU 5:23-CV-190-H-1 and FNU LNU 5:23-CV-190-H-2
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Young v. Lubbock County Sheriff
as 5:2023cv00184
Petitioner:
Charles Young
Respondent:
TDCJ Parole Division, Daniella Martinez, Vicente Perez and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Young v. Pulaski County Detention Center
as 4:2023cv00088
Plaintiff:
Charles Young
Defendant:
Pulaski County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Young v. McClendon et al
as 3:2022cv00710
Plaintiff:
Charles Young and Charles Young, Jr.
Defendant:
Carolyn McClendon and Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Young v. Leveins
as 2:2021cv00505
Petitioner:
Lonnie Charles Young
Respondent:
FNU Leveins and Florida Department of Corrections Secretary
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Young v. Baldwin et al
as 1:2019cv00109
Defendant:
Moore, John Baldwin and Illinois Dept Of Corrections
Plaintiff:
Henry Charles Young
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sundari Prasad v. M. Lauck
as 17-7295
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SUNDARI K. PRASAD
Defendant - Appellee:
JUDGE M. HANNAH LAUCK, MAGISTRATE RODERICK CHARLES YOUNG and PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP
Kenneth Newkirk v. General Assembly
as 16-7480
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KENNETH H. NEWKIRK
Defendant - Appellee:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY, SUPREME COURT, TERRY MCAULIFFE, Governor and others
(PC) Langston v. Thompson et al
as 2:2016cv02509
Defendant:
Thompson, K. Calkins, A. Babat and others
Plaintiff:
(PC) Langston and Walter Shane Langston
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.
