Cases 21 - 30 of 57
Mitchell v. Humphrey et al
as 4:2018cv00181
Defendant:
FNU McGaba, FNU Harvey, Timothy Brooks and others
Plaintiff:
Karl C. Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daker v. Dozier et al
as 6:2018cv00073
Defendant:
Warden Jack Koon, Dr. Sharon Lewis, Lisa Fountain and others
Plaintiff:
Waseem Daker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Solo El v. Morris et al
as 3:2017cv00837
Plaintiff:
Sehven Arcamedes Solo El
Defendant:
Kimberly Morris, "ROXIE" LNU, FNU Adams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kidd v. University of Texas Medical Branch et al
as 9:2017cv00172
Plaintiff:
Carlos Kidd
Defendant:
University of Texas Medical Branch, Chi Saint Lukes Hospital, FNU Wen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. GEO Corrections et al
as 5:2017cv00903
Plaintiff:
Ezekiel Davis
Defendant:
GEO Corrections, Amber Martin, FNU Collins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tijerina v. Catoe et al
as 6:2017cv00265
Plaintiff:
David Tijerina
Defendant:
Jeffery Catoe, Jeffery Richardson, FNU Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Adams-Bey v. Rogers et al
as 3:2017cv00210
Plaintiff:
Gregory Adams-Bey
Defendant:
FNU Rogers, FNU Gibbs, FNU Adams and others
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. GEO Group Corrections, et al
as 17-6059
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EZEKIEL DAVIS
Defendant - Appellee:
GEO GROUP CORRECTIONS, INC., AMBER MARTIN, Vice President of GEO Group, Inc., individually and in her official capacity, HECTOR RIOS, JR., Warden, individually and in his official capacity and others
Copeland v. Doe et al
as 5:2016cv00689
Plaintiff:
Shannon Copeland
Defendant:
Jane Doe, FNU Terralonge, Kimberly Angel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cobb v. Winder et al
as 2:2016cv00885
Plaintiff:
Brent Mayon Cobb
Defendant:
James Winder, Scott Carver, Pamela Lofgreen 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.
