Cases 1 - 6 of 6
David Hernandez v. Brad Livingston, et al
as 12-50020
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID LIGHTFOOT HERNANDEZ
Defendant - Appellee:
BRAD LIVINGSTON, Executive Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Individually and in his Official Capacity, 209 W. 14th St., 5th Floor, Austin, Texas 78701, BRYAN COLLIER, Executive Director, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Individually and in his Official Capacity, P. O. Box 99, Huntsville, Texas 77340; 8610 Shoel Creek Blvd., Austin, TX 78757, LINDA MCCARVER, Regional Supervisor, Board of Pardons and Paroles, Individually and in her Official Capacity, 3609 Profit Place, Temple, TX 76501 and others
Angela Wilson v. John Maples, et al
as 10-2605
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Angela Denise Wilson
Defendant - Appellee:
John Maples, Warden, McPherson Unit, ADC, Lavonda Dunivon, Sgt., McPherson Unit, ADC, Patricia Roberts, Sgt., McPherson Unit, ADC and others
David Hernandez v. Susan Thomson, et al
as 10-50497
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID LIGHTFOOT HERNANDEZ
Defendant - Appellee:
SUSAN THOMSON, CPRS Regional Director, Individually and in her Official Capacity, TERESA GOLD, CPRS Program Director, Region 7, Individually and in her Official Capacity, ANNA CLARK MARTINEZ, CPRS Supervisor, Individually and in her Official Capacity and others
Hernandez v. Thomson et al
as 1:2010cv00050
Defendant:
Brian Collier, Gwen Cox, Dow Fogleman and others
Plaintiff:
David Lightfoot Hernandez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hernandez vs Livingston, et al
as 6:2009cv00055
Plaintiff:
David Lightfoot Hernandez
Defendant:
Brad Livingston, Bryan Collier, Linda McCarver and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilson v. Maples et al
as 1:2008cv00041
Plaintiff:
Angela Denise Wilson
Defendant:
John Maples, Lavonda Dunivon, Patricia Roberts 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.
