Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Jackson v. Brookfield Properties Retail, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv01104
Plaintiff:
Katrina D. Jackson
Defendant:
Brookfield Properties Retail, Inc. and Andy Frain Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Goss, Sr. v. Jackson
as 2:2023cv00722
Petitioner:
Darrell L. Goss, Sr.
Respondent:
Shane D. Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Goss, Sr. v. Brown et al
as 2:2022cv04331
Plaintiff:
Darrell L. Goss, Sr.
Defendant:
Mike Brown, Edward Moultrie, Vernon Gore and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Goss, Sr. v. Jackson
as 2:2022cv04048
Petitioner:
Darrell L. Goss, Sr.
Respondent:
Warden Shane D. Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv02990
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Wilson v. Anderson City Police Department, The et al
as 8:2021cv02253
Plaintiff:
Gregory Wilson
Defendant:
Anderson City Police Department, The, Officer Joseph Chapman, Anderson County Sheriff's Office, The and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Goss, Sr. v. Jackson et al
as 2:2021cv00084
Plaintiff:
Darrell L. Goss, Sr.
Defendant:
South Carolina Department of Corrections and D Jackson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jackson v. State of South Carolina
as 4:2019cv00179
Respondent:
State of South Carolina and Warden Lee Correctional Institution
Petitioner:
Michael D. Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jackson v. Mauney
as 4:2015cv00298
Petitioner:
George D Jackson
Respondent:
Robert Mauney
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jackson v. State of South Carolina
as 4:2008cv02340
Petitioner:
George D Jackson
Respondent:
State of South Carolina
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
