Cases 91 - 100 of 173
Watts v. Jefferson et al
as 4:2010cv00090
Plaintiff:
Carl Watts
Defendant:
Antonio Jefferson, Christopher Epps and Timothy J. Morris
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carroll v. King et al
as 4:2010cv00078
Plaintiff:
Wiley Zachary Carroll
Defendant:
Earnest King, Timothy Morris and Christopher Epps
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stephen Harris v. Christopher Epps, et al
as 10-60461
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STEPHEN HARRIS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER EPPS, Mississippi Department of Corrections Commissioner, LANETTE JORDAN, Mississippi Department of Corrections Director/Classification, LAWRENCE KELLY, Superintendent/Mississippi State Prison and others
Carter v. Burk et al
as 3:2010cv00330
Plaintiff:
Vincent Earl Carter
Defendant:
Rufus Burk, Varsharske Anderson, Jamal Bruce and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Powers v. Epps et al
as 4:2010cv00057
Plaintiff:
Stephen Elliott Powers
Defendant:
Christopher Epps, Lawrence Kelly, John Rogers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bobby Clemons v. Ron King, et al
as 10-60345
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BOBBY TYRESE CLEMONS
Defendant - Appellee:
RON KING, RON WOODALL, CHRISTOPHER EPPS and others
James Stern v. Christopher Epps, et al
as 10-60333
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES H STERN
Defendant - Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER EPPS
Nance v. Epps et al
as 4:2010cv00032
Plaintiff:
Jerry Nance
Defendant:
Christopher Epps, The State of Mississippi and Kentrell Liddell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Long v. Carroll County et al
as 4:2010cv00018
Plaintiff:
Michael Long
Defendant:
Carroll County, Arthur L. Smith, ODell Edwards and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James Stern v. Christopher Epps, et al
as 10-60181
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES H STERN
Defendant - Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER EPPS, KEEFE COMMISSARY NETWORK and G. T. ENTERPRISES OF MISSISSIPPI, INCORPORATED
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.
