Cases 41 - 50 of 104
Perkins v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID et al
as 3:2016cv02437
Plaintiff:
Troy Lee Perkins
Defendant:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID, Tony O'Hare, 282nd Judicial District Court and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
v. Casey et al
as 3:2016cv00451
Defendant:
John Casey and City of Dallas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Epps v. City of Dallas Police Department et al
as 3:2015cv03881
Plaintiff:
Tony Epps
Defendant:
City of Dallas Police Department, Susan Hawk and Unknown Trial Lawyer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dietrick Johnson, Sr. v. City of Dallas, et al
as 15-10942
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DIETRICK LEWIS JOHNSON, SR.
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, UNITED STATES MARSHALS, Fugitive Task Force and others
Sharpless v. The City of Dallas
as 3:2015cv03081
Plaintiff:
Dennis Clay Sharpless
Defendant:
The City of Dallas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Dallas County Jail et al
as 3:2015cv02908
Plaintiff:
Robert Davis
Defendant:
Dallas County Jail, City of Dallas, Mike Rawlings and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lawrence Dixon v. Muhammad Zeem, et al
as 15-10863
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LAWRENCE E. DIXON
Defendant - Appellee:
DOCTOR MUHAMMAD E. ZEEM, LEW STERRETT COUNTY JAIL, Medical Department and CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS
Hagwood v. Dallas Police Department et al
as 3:2015cv02622
Plaintiff:
TJ Hagwood
Defendant:
Dallas Police Department, City of Dallas and Dallas County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dixon v. Zeem et al
as 3:2015cv02448
Plaintiff:
Lawrence E Dixon
Defendant:
Muhammad E Zeem, Lew Sterrett County Jail and The City of Dallas, Texas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. City of Dallas et al
as 3:2015cv02111
Plaintiff:
Dietrick L Johnson, Sr
Defendant:
City of Dallas, Dallas Police Department, Dallas Police Impound and others
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.
