Cases 1 - 10 of 85
Ross v. Reynolds et al
as 1:2026cv01013
Defendant:
Mary Davis, Sheriff Frank Reynolds, Thomas Pinyan and others
Plaintiff:
John S. Ross
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2025cv02250
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Ross v. Reynolds et al
as 1:2025cv01974
Defendant:
Mary Davis, Frank Reynolds, Thomas Pinyan and others
Plaintiff:
John S. Ross
Cross-Plaintiff:
Bradley W. Johnson, Thomas Pinyan, Lauren Denson and others
Cross-Defendant:
Correcthealth Cherokee, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1443 (1)Removal from State Court - Civil Rights
JONES v. TORRES et al
as 4:2024cv00148
Defendant:
USDC, Commander LARRY MITCHELL and Sergeant TORRES
Plaintiff:
TERRY JONES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BROWN v. MITCHELL et al
as 4:2024cv00144
Defendant:
Warden LARRY MITCHELL, JOHN DOE and Sheriff GREG COUNTRYMAN
Plaintiff:
JESSIE L BROWN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FLORENCE v. HYLES et al
as 4:2024cv00084
Respondent:
Deputy Sheriff CALVIN PARKER, Judge STEVEN D SMITH, Former Chief FREDDIE D BLACKMON and others
Petitioner:
KIM CAMILLE FLORENCE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Kim Florence v. District Attorney of Columbus, et al
as 24-11037
Plaintiff:
KIM CAMILLE FLORENCE
Defendant:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF COLUMBUS, MAYOR OF COLUMBUS, SHERIFF OF COLUMBUS and others
CONNOR v. MITCHELL
as 4:2023cv00200
Plaintiff:
TONY L CONNOR, MOSES ROBERSON, KELVIN KING and others
Defendant:
Commander LARRY MITCHELL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ALLEN v. WHITAKER et al
as 4:2023cv00171
Plaintiff:
AANDRE DAVID ALLEN
Defendant:
Deputy WHITAKER, Warden LARRY MITCHELL and Captan ROBERT TROMBLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
