Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Dennis Davis, Jr. v. Robert Whyce, et al
as 18-30763
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DENNIS RAY DAVIS, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
ROBERT BOBBY WHYCE, CHERLY STILLS, YOULANDA WILLIAMS and others
Darwin Yarls, Jr., et al v. Derwyn Bunton, et al
as 17-30779
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARWIN YARLS, JR., On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, LEROY SHAW, JR., On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated and DOUGLAS BROWN, On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated
Defendant - Appellee:
DERWYN BUNTON, in his official capacity as Chief District Defender for Orleans Parish, Louisiana and JAMES T. DIXON, JR., in his official capacity as Louisiana State Public Defender
Dixon v. Leu et al
as 3:2017cv00179
Plaintiff:
James T. Dixon
Defendant:
C/O Leu, C/O Arp, C/O Momenee and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Washington v. Burton et al
as 2:2016cv14114
Plaintiff:
Damond J. Washington
Defendant:
Derwyn Burton, James Dixon, Zachary Carpenter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas Jackson v. John Edwards, et al
as 16-30653
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS JACKSON, real party in interest Gregory Cormier
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN BEL EDWARDS, in his official capacity as Governor, State of Louisiana, JOHN N. KENNEDY, in his official capacity as Treasurer, State of Louisiana, ROBERT J. BURNS, in his official capacity as Chairman, Louisiana Public Defender Board and others
Jackson v. Edwards et al
as 3:2016cv00165
Defendant:
Robert J. Burns, James T. Dixon, Jr., Jay Dixon and others
Plaintiff:
Thomas Jackson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Yarls et al v. Bunton et al
as 3:2016cv00031
Plaintiff:
Douglas Brown, Leroy Shaw, Jr. and Darwin Yarls, Jr.
Defendant:
Derwyn Bunton and James T Dixon, Jr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
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.
