Cases 1 - 10 of 2,196
Alvarez v. Lumpkin et al
as 1:2024cv00181
Plaintiff:
Edwing Ahmed Alvarez
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Timothy Fitzpatrick, Angela N Chevalier and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Alvarez v. Lumpkin et al
as 1:2024cv00180
Plaintiff:
Edwing Ahmed Alvarez
Defendant:
Bobby Lumpkin, Timothy Fitzpatrick, Christopher L Norsworthy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Polk v. Lumpkin
as 9:2024cv00092
Petitioner:
Mavis Ray Polk
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kindred v. Texas Parole Board et al
as 6:2024cv00259
Plaintiff:
Herman Lee Kindred
Defendant:
Texas Parole Board, Temple, Texas Parole Office, Field Officers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tate v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01749
Petitioner:
Marquis Valantee Tate
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lester v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00413
Petitioner:
Timmy Heath Lester
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Alexander v. Correctional Managed Health Care et al
as 4:2024cv01709
Plaintiff:
Darrold Alexander
Defendant:
Correctional Managed Health Care, Dr. Lannette Linthicum, Bobby Lumpkin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mathews v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01755
Petitioner:
Mike Naoyuki Mathews
Respondent:
TDCJ, Director Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hughes v. Lumpkin
as 5:2024cv00479
Petitioner:
Darren Tramell Hughes
Respondent:
Director of TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Taylor v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01754
Petitioner:
Robert Cor'Darius Taylor
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
