Cases 1 - 10 of 58
Ramos-Vargas v. Huntingdon Prison Administration
as 3:2024cv00133
Plaintiff:
Jose L. Ramos-Vargas
Defendant:
Huntingdon Prison Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
RAMOS-VARGAS v. HUNTINGDON PRISON ADMINISTRATION
as 2:2024cv00089
Plaintiff:
JOSE L. RAMOS-VARGAS
Defendant:
HUNTINGDON PRISON ADMINISTRATION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ramos v. Lumpkin
as 23-20346
Petitioner / Appellant:
Jose Ricardo Ramos
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
CABRERA v. USA
as 1:2023cv00129
Petitioner:
JOSE ARMONDO RAMOS CABRERA
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv23698
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
RAMOS-VARGAS v. WARD et al
as 2:2022cv04606
Plaintiff:
JOSE L. RAMOS-VARGAS and JOSE L. RAMOS VARGAS
Defendant:
ESQ. ALEXANDER WARD, JUDGE MICHAEL KOURY and ALEXANDER WARD, ESQ.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ramos v. Lumpkin
as 4:2022cv02242
Petitioner:
Jose Ricardo Ramos
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ramos v. Malloy et al
as 3:2018cv01669
Plaintiff:
Jose E. Ramos
Defendant:
State of Connecticut, George Jepsen, Scott Semple and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jose Ramos v. Lorie Davis, Director
as 18-20490
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOSE MAGDALENO RAMOS
Respondent - Appellee:
LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Ramos v. Malloy et al
as 3:2018cv00744
Plaintiff:
Jose E. Ramos
Defendant:
Dannel P. Malloy, Scott S. Semple, William Mulligan 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.
