Cases 1 - 10 of 101
Cruse Jr. v. Mississippi Dept of Corrections et al
as 4:2021cv00150
Plaintiff:
Andrew c. Cruse Jr.
Defendant:
Mississippi Dept of Corrections, Vitalcore Health Strategies, M.D.O.C. Cheif Medical Director Dennis Gregory and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Williams v. King
as 3:2020cv00287
Petitioner:
Dillion Williams
Respondent:
Ronald King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jamison v. Central Mississippi Correctional Facility et al
as 4:2020cv00180
Defendant:
CMCF Medical Department, Central Mississippi Correctional Facility, Burl Cain and others
Plaintiff:
Andrew Jamison
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Meetze v. CMCF Medical Dept. et al
as 4:2020cv00181
Defendant:
L. Sutton, Warden Miller, J. Farmer and others
Plaintiff:
Randy Wilmoth Meetze
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Turner v. King et al
as 1:2020cv00105
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Mississippi and Sup. Ronald King
Petitioner:
Johnny Turner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Harth v. Mississippi Department of Correction, et al
as 4:2020cv00047
Defendant:
Brittney Lathum, Kelvin Williams, Sr., Boliver County Regional Correction Facility and others
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Dwayne Harth, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Eacholes v. Taylor et al
as 4:2020cv00035
Defendant:
Tammy Taylor, Mississippi Department of Corrections and Ronald King
Plaintiff:
Deairis Simone Eacholes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Jamison v. King
as 3:2020cv00020
Petitioner:
Andrew Jamison
Respondent:
Ron King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis v. King et al
as 4:2019cv00161
Petitioner:
Elbert Davis
Respondent:
Attorney General Jim Hood and Ronald King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Denman v. Ware et al
as 4:2019cv00140
Plaintiff:
Kelvin Denman
Defendant:
Captian King, Lt. Ecko Roberts, Warden Wendell Banks and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
