Cases 1 - 10 of 346
Brantley v. Johnson
as 1:2016cv00661
Petitioner:
Harry Brantley
Respondent:
Gene Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Coles v. Everett et al
as 2:2013cv00072
Petitioner:
Corey Coles
Respondent:
D. Everett and Gene Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Coles v. Ralph Northcutt et al., and Spouse et al
as 2:2012cv00630
Plaintiff:
Corey Coles
Defendant:
Ralph Northcutt et al., and Spouse, Harold Clarke and Spouse, G. Robinson and Spouse and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barnes v. Johnson et al
as 3:2012cv00053
Plaintiff:
Faye Barnes
Defendant:
Johnathan Bernard Bland, Wendy Hobbs, John Jabe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Coleman v. Jabe et al
as 7:2011cv00518
Defendant:
Major Batton, Robert Bivens, Lou Cei and others
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Coleman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Turner v. Johnson et al
as 1:2011cv01086
Plaintiff:
Charles R. Turner
Defendant:
Gene Johnson, Kimberly Runion and The C.R.C. Committee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Douglas v. Johnson et al
as 7:2011cv00468
Defendant:
Harold Clarke, John Garman, Sgt. Chris Gilbert and others
Plaintiff:
Lamont O. Douglas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Canada v. Clarke et al
as 7:2011cv00408
Defendant:
Nurse Practioner Deborah Ball, C/O Grant Bledsoe, Lt. Blevins and others
Plaintiff:
Kelvin A. Canada
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Canada v. Johnson et al
as 7:2011cv00369
Defendant:
D. Ball, Grant Bledsoe, Blevins and others
Plaintiff:
Kelvin A. Canada
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
De'lonta v. Johnson et al
as 7:2011cv00257
Defendant:
Gary L. Bass, Meredith R. Carey, Major C. Davis and others
Plaintiff:
Ophelia Azriel De'lonta
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
