Cases 1 - 10 of 46
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-2055
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Dwight Rudisill v. Merrick Garland
as 23-6133
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DWIGHT ALEXANDER RUDISILL
Defendant / Appellee:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Department of Justice, Attorney General, in his Official capacity, DAVID ALAN BROWN, SR., Assistant United States Attorney, in his Individual capacity, UNKNOWN UNITED STATES MARSHALS, United States Marshal, in their Individual capacities and others
Dwight Rudisill v. Merrick Garland
as 23-6024
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DWIGHT ALEXANDER RUDISILL
Defendant / Appellee:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Department of Justice, Attorney General, in his Official capacity, DAVID ALAN BROWN, SR., Assistant United States Attorney, in his Individual capacity, UNKNOWN UNITED STATES MARSHALS, United States Marshal, in their Individual capacities and others
Rudisill v. Garland et al
as 1:2022cv00227
Plaintiff:
Dwight A. Rudisill
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, David Alan Brown, Sr., Unknown United States Marshals and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00406
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination
Miller v. Davis
as 4:2020cv01996
Petitioner:
Jerry J Miller
Respondent:
Lorie Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Miller v. Mediacom LLC et al
as 1:2020cv00193
Defendant:
United Parcel Service, Inc., Mediacom LLC, Bigham Cable Construction, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Jerry Lynn Miller
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ROLAND v. STATE OF FLORIDA et al
as 1:2020cv00002
Defendant:
JERRY B MILLER, DAVID A GLANT, MICHAEL BRYANT and others
Plaintiff:
GREGORY ROLAND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Miller v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 2:2018cv00076
Petitioner:
Jerry Lee Miller
Respondent:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
