Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Thomas v. Morrison et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00592
Plaintiff:
Michael LeRoy Thomas
Defendant:
J. Morrison and P. Harvey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. Morrison et al
as 2:2023cv01009
Petitioner:
Michael LeRoy Thomas
Respondent:
J Morrison and P Harvey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Larry Rush v. Superintendent Greene SCI, et al
as 23-2177
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LARRY RUSH, a/k/a LEROY THOMAS
Defendant / Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT GREENE SCI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
RUSH v. SORBER et al
as 2:2022cv03796
Petitioner:
LARRY RUSH and LEROY THOMAS
Respondent:
JAMIE K. SORBER, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF LAWRENCE S. KRASNER PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, JOSH SHAPIRO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
THOMAS v. WARDEN SCI FOREST et al
as 1:2021cv00235
Petitioner:
JAMES LEROY THOMAS
Respondent:
PA ATTORNEY GENERAL, ERIE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY and WARDEN SCI FOREST
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
RUSH v. GILMORE et al
as 2:2019cv05816
Petitioner:
LARRY RUSH and LEROY THOMAS
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT ROBERT GILMORE, LAWRENCE S. KRASNER and JOSH SHAPIRO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Thomas v. United States of America (INMATE 3)
as 1:2019cv00792
Plaintiff:
Joseph Leroy Thomas
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Thomas v. Director TDCJ - CID
as 7:2019cv00056
Petitioner:
Vincent Leroy Thomas
Respondent:
Director TDCJ - CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Thomas v. Caddo County Jail et al
as 5:2016cv00228
Plaintiff:
Leroy Thomas
Defendant:
Caddo County Jail, Nyles Parton, Gene Cain and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Dallas County Jail
as 3:2014cv01888
Plaintiff:
Vincent Leroy Thomas, Jr
Defendant:
Dallas County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
