Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 31 - 40 of 821
Rivera v. Anderson et al
as 7:2024cv00224
Plaintiff: Denis Alberto Rivera
Defendant: David Anderson, Harold W. Clarke, Randall C. Mathena and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shuron Barksdale v. Chadwick Dotson
as 24-6289
Petitioner: SHURON MAURICE BARKSDALE
Respondent: CHADWICK DOTSON, Director, Department of Corrections
Swilling v. Dotson
as 2:2024cv00192
Petitioner: Sheldon Swilling
Respondent: Chadwick Dotson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Adams v. Dotson
as 2:2024cv00188
Petitioner: Kenyatta H. Adams
Respondent: Chadwick Dotson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
White v. Dotson
as 2:2024cv00189
Petitioner: Derek L. White
Respondent: Chadwick Dotson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Leo Farnsworth v. Glenn Youngkin
as 24-6273
Plaintiff: LEO BRANDON FARNSWORTH
Defendant: GLENN YOUNGKIN, TERRANCE C. COLE, CHADWICK DOTSON and others
Christopher Lumpkin v. VDOC Director Dotson
as 24-6275
Plaintiff: CHRISTOPHER DEWAYNE LUMPKIN
Defendant: VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR CHADWICK DOTSON, SUSSEX I STATE PRISON MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, MS. CARTER, Head of All Medical Departments of Virginia Department of Corrections and others
Michael Fuller v. Chadwick Dotson
as 24-6254
Petitioner: MICHAEL ROY FULLER
Respondent: CHADWICK DOTSON, Director
Dudley v. Dotson
as 1:2024cv00451
Petitioner: Christopher Dudley
Respondent: Chadwick Dotson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Patrick Carmody v. TDOC, et al
as 24-5243
Plaintiff: PATRICK S. CARMODY
Defendant: TDOC, FRANK STRADA, Commissioner, in his individual and official capacities, LEE DOTSON, Asst. Commissioner, in his official and individual capacities and others

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.


Why Is My Information Online?