Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Johnson v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID, et al
as 4:2019cv00107
Plaintiff:
Roderick Sherrod Johnson
Defendant:
G. Parker, M. Alsobrook, Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Davis et al
as 4:2019cv00034
Respondent:
M. Alsobrook, G. Parker, Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID and others
Petitioner:
Roderick Sherrod Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
JOHNSON v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID
as 5:2018cv00107
Respondent:
M. ALSOBROOK, G. PARKER, L.E. TOWNSEND and others
Petitioner:
RODERICK SHERROD JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
JOHNSON v. PARKER et al
as 1:2018cv01603
Respondent:
M. ALSOBROOK, G. PARKER and L.E. TOWNSEND
Petitioner:
RODERICK SHERROD JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CHARLES v. PARKER et al
as 1:2018cv00696
Petitioner:
VERNON LEANDIS CHARLES
Respondent:
G. PARKER, L. E. TOWNSEND, M. ALSOBROOK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnna v. Putnam et al
as 2:2016cv00429
Plaintiff:
Johnny Redfern
Defendant:
K Putnam, M Alsobrook, Vance Drum and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lathan v. Stevens et al
as 2:2016cv00147
Plaintiff:
Darryl Lathan
Defendant:
William Stevens, M. Alsobrook and K Gaitan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Toliver v. William G. McConnell Unit's Administration et al
as 2:2013cv00325
Plaintiff:
Louis McCardell Toliver
Defendant:
William G. McConnell Unit's Administration, C. Monroe, M. Alsobrook and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McCoy v. Bowers et al
as 5:2012cv00974
Respondent:
M. Alsobrook, Roger E. Bowers and Elva T. Tanguma
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Petitioner:
Calvin McCoy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ALSOBROOKS v. SEATRAIN LINES, INC.
as 2:2010cv31058
Plaintiff:
ARTHUR M. ALSOBROOKS
Defendant:
SEATRAIN LINES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
