Cases 11 - 20 of 54
Carl Brown v. Joe Driver
as 13-35026
Petitioner - Appellant:
CARL E. BROWN
Respondent - Appellee:
JOE D. DRIVER
Johnson v. Lyden et al
as 3:2012cv00243
Plaintiff:
Jesse Johnson
Defendant:
Timothy Lyden, Joe D. Driver and Tami Anding
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Anthony Boyd v. Joe Driver, et al
as 11-41121
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANTHONY BOYD
Defendant - Appellee:
JOE D DRIVER, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution Three Rivers, PHILLIP CHILDS, Associate Warden, Federal Correctional Institution Three Rivers, MIKE DUNGAN, Associate Warden, Federal Correctional Institution Three Rivers and others
Brown v. Driver
as 3:2011cv00150
Plaintiff:
Carl E. Brown
Defendant:
Joe D. Driver
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eunice Husband v. Harrell Watt
as 11-6771
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EUNICE HUSBAND
Defendant - Appellee:
HARRELL WATTS, Administrator, National Inmate Appeals; individual capacity, K. M. WHITE, Regional Director, Mid-Atlantic Regional Office; individual capacity, JOE D. DRIVER, Warden, United States Penitentiary-Hazelton; individual capacity and others
Arnold v. Lappin et al
as 4:2011cv02217
Plaintiff:
Jeremiah Dewayne Arnold
Defendant:
Harry Lappin, Joe D. Driver and Sal Hernandez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Norberto Robles v. Joe Driver
as 10-20270
Petitioner - Appellant:
NORBERTO ROBLES
Respondent - Appellee:
JOE D DRIVER, Warden, Houston Federal Detention Center
Robles v. Driver
as 4:2010cv00694
Petitioner:
Norberto Robles
Respondent:
Joe D. Driver
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jeff Williamson v. Joe Driver
as 10-20085
Petitioner - Appellant:
JEFF H WILLIAMSON
Respondent - Appellee:
JOE D DRIVER, Warden, Houston FDC
Shawn Phillips v. Joe Driver
as 10-6115
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SHAWN A. PHILLIPS
Defendant - Appellee:
JOE D. DRIVER, Warden, L. ODDO, Captain, MR. ANTONELLIE, SIS Lieutenant 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.
