Cases 1 - 10 of 141
Montalto v. Shaw
as 23-60151
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Stephen Montalto
Defendant / Appellee:
Frank Shaw, Warden, Management Training Corporation, Jaburious Jackson, Unit Manager and others
Bradley v. Shaw
as 22-60320
Petitioner / Appellant:
Stanley Lee Bradley
Respondent / Appellee:
Frank Shaw
Holloway v. Shaw
as 22-60101
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Jason Holloway
Defendant / Appellee:
Warden Frank Shaw, Management & Training Corporporation, Individual capacity and Official capacity, Warden of Security N. Hogans, Management & Training Corporporation, Individual capacity and Official capacity, Jane Does 1-100, Management & Training Corporporation, Individual capacity and Official capacity and others
Hart v. Shaw et al
as 3:2022cv00024
Plaintiff:
Eugene Hart
Defendant:
Warden Frank Shaw and Rush Foundation Hospital
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Shaw
as 21-60886
Petitioner / Appellant:
Michael Jerome Williams
Respondent / Appellee:
Warden Frank Shaw
Davis v. Shaw
as 21-60739
Petitioner / Appellant:
David L. Davis
Respondent / Appellee:
Frank Shaw, Warden of East Mississippi Correctional Facility, Meridian, Mississippi
Montalto v. Shaw et al
as 3:2020cv00822
Defendant:
Warden Frank Shaw, E.M.C.F., Officer Gracie and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Plaintiff:
Stephen Montalto
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Shaw
as 3:2020cv00778
Plaintiff:
Michael Jerome Williams
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Defendant:
Warden Frank Shaw
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis v. Shaw
as 1:2020cv00299
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Plaintiff:
David L. Davis
Defendant:
State of Mississippi and Frank Shaw
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Johnson v. Shaw
as 3:2020cv00239
Defendant:
Frank Shaw
Petitioner:
Vadell Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
