Cases 41 - 50 of 135
Huckabay v. Tennessee Department of Correction et al
as 1:2011cv01335
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Huckabay
Defendant:
Tennessee Department of Correction, Reuben Hodge, Corrections Corporations of America and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Calvin Wilhite v. Corrections Corporation of Ame, et al
as 11-6259
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CALVIN WILHITE
Defendant - Appellee:
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA, HARDEMAN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES CORPORATION, JOE EASTERLING, Warden, Individually and in his official capacity as Warden of Hardeman County Correctional Facility and others
Defendant:
STATE OF TENNESSEE
Clarence Spinks v. Joe Easterling
as 11-6154
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CLARENCE EDWARD SPINKS
Defendant - Appellee:
JOE EASTERLING, Warden
Shatswell v. Easterling
as 3:2011cv00905
Petitioner:
William Fount Shatswell
Respondent:
Joe Easterling
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv02830
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Mills v. Corrections Corporation of America et al
as 1:2011cv01281
Plaintiff:
Michael Mills
Defendant:
Corrections Corporation of America, Joe Easterling, Rosie Kendrix and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fowler v. Easterling
as 3:2011cv00435
Petitioner:
Warren Fowler
Respondent:
Joe Easterling
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Newsom v. Hardeman County Correctional Facility et al
as 1:2011cv01260
Plaintiff:
James E. Newsom
Defendant:
Hardeman County Correctional Facility, Joe Easterling and Joy L/N/U
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bailey v. Easterling
as 1:2011cv01234
Petitioner:
Jamie Bailey
Respondent:
Joe Easterling
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Davis v. Easterling et al
as 2:2011cv00159
Petitioner:
Andre Davis
Respondent:
Joe Easterling and Attorney General of the State of Mississippi
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.
