Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Fudge v. Jones et al
as 2:2024cv00919
Defendant:
TRCI-DHO-Doc C. Cortazar, Sec C.O. J. Bush, ODOC/Office-Pop-Mgr. Greg Jones and others
Plaintiff:
Bubba Fudge, James Charles Fudge and Bubba
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Fudge v. Jones et al
as 3:2024cv00919
Plaintiff:
James Charles Fudge
Defendant:
ODOC/Office-Pop-Mgr. Greg Jones, TRCI-Doc-Supt. T. Rumsey, TRCI-Doc-Supt. E. Reyes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Fudge v. Towers et al
as 6:2023cv00986
Plaintiff:
James Charles Fudge
Defendant:
Christina Towers, Brian Stephen, Corey Fhuere and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
James Fudge v. Bret Bennett, et al
as 22-35723
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES CHARLES FUDGE
Defendant / Appellee:
BRET BENNETT, NANCY ARMSTRONG, JEREMY BEAUMONT and others
James Fudge v. Bret Bennett, et al
as 22-35708
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES CHARLES FUDGE
Defendant / Appellee:
BRET BENNETT, NANCY ARMSTRONG, JEREMY BEAUMONT and others
Fudge v. Bennett et al
as 2:2019cv01102
Defendant:
J. Olive, J. Carjal, C. Ford and others
Plaintiff:
James Charles Fudge
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
James Fudge v. Stephen Watson, et al
as 16-3994
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Charles Fudge
Defendant - Appellee:
Stephen Watson, Correctional Officer, Varner SuperMax, Randall Watson, Warden, Varner SuperMax, Justine M. Minor, Correctional Hearing Official, ADC and others
James Fudge v. Wendy Kelley
as 16-1904
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Charles Fudge, also known as James Bubba Fudge
Defendant - Appellee:
Wendy Kelley, Director, ADC
James Fudge v. Grant Harris, et al
as 16-1672
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Charles Fudge
Defendant - Appellee:
Grant Harris, Former Warden, ADC, Assistant Deputy Director, Moses Jackson, Deputy Assistant Warden, Varner Supermax, ADC, James Banks, Warden, ADC and others
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.
