Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Lane v. Lumpkin
as 23-20069
Petitioner / Appellant:
Michael Lane
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Lane v. Lumpkin
as 4:2022cv02329
Petitioner:
Michael Lane
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lane v. Prator et al
as 5:2021cv03293
Plaintiff:
Sean Michael Lane
Defendant:
Steve Prator, Caddo Correctional Center, Robert Wyche and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. Collier et al
as 6:2017cv00566
Plaintiff:
Michael Lane
Defendant:
Bryan Collier and Lorie Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-ID
as 6:2017cv00504
Petitioner:
Michael Lane
Respondent:
DIRECTOR, TDCJ-ID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Lane v. Collier et al
as 6:2017cv00381
Plaintiff:
Michael Lane
Defendant:
Bryan Collier, Jeffery Catoe and Kitchen Manager
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Lane v. John Rupert, et al
as 17-40253
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL LANE
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN A. RUPERT, Individually & in his/her official capacity as Warden, LARRY S. DOLYE, Individually & in his/her official capacity as Assistant Warden, JEFF CATOE, Individually & in his/her official capacity as Assistant Warden and others
Michael Lane v. Gaye Karriker, et al
as 16-40400
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL LANE
Defendant - Appellee:
GAYE L. KARRIKER, SHAUNA VESTAL, WILLIAM D. BROWN and others
Lane v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice et al
as 6:2016cv00145
Defendant:
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Texas Correctional Industries and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Lane
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. Karriker et al
as 6:2015cv01149
Plaintiff:
Michael Lane
Defendant:
Gaye L Karriker, Shauna Vestal, William D Brown and others
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.
