Cases 1 - 10 of 27
George Davis, III v. John Woodson
as 22-6543
Petitioner / Appellant:
GEORGE W. DAVIS, III
Respondent / Appellee:
JOHN A. WOODSON, Warden
Davis v. Woodson
as 3:2022cv00188
Petitioner:
George Washington Davis, III
Respondent:
John A. Woodson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tamar Harvey v. Frederick Russell
as 22-6077
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TAMAR DEVELL HARVEY
Defendant / Appellee:
FREDERICK RUSSELL, Asst. Warden
Defendant:
D. LANDAUER, N.P., DR. ARAKAKY, DAVID A. RYLAK, MD of Augusta Health Center and others
WOODSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv55653
Plaintiff:
JOHN ADAM WOODSON
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Zellers v. Northam, et al
as 7:2021cv00393
Plaintiff:
Charles E. Zellers, Sr.
Defendant:
Unknown, Ralph S. Northam, Brian J. Moran and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Evans El v. Woodson
as 1:2021cv00346
Respondent:
John A. Woodson
Petitioner:
Frederick R. Evans El
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Davis Bey v. Woodson
as 3:2020cv00973
Petitioner:
George W. Davis Bey
Respondent:
John A. Woodson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Brooks v. Woodson et al
as 7:2020cv00478
Defendant:
Tracy Lawhorn, A. Miller, John A. Woodson and others
Plaintiff:
Antonio L. Brooks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McInnis v. Woodson
as 3:2020cv00561
Petitioner:
Andarion Lorenzo McInnis
Respondent:
John A. Woodson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Tamar Harvey v. D. Landauer
as 20-6849
Defendant / Appellee:
ERIC BURCH, LEWIS, Augusta Correctional Center Officer, D. LANDAUER, N.P. and others
Defendant:
MICHAEL R. PLAUTZ, MD Augusta Otolaryngology Assoc., DR. DANIEL PETERS, University of Virginia Health System, Otolaryngology, AUGUSTA OTOLARYNGOLOGY ASSOCIATION and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TAMAR DEVELL HARVEY
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.
