Cases 21 - 30 of 243
MORRIS v. CROWDER
as 5:2022cv00142
Petitioner:
MIMS MICHAEL MORRIS, JR
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL MATTHEW B CROWDER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Morris v. Crowder
as 1:2022cv00040
Petitioner:
Mims Michael Morris and Mims Michael Morris, Jr.
Respondent:
Matthew B. Crowder
Not Classified By Court:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pendergrass v. Whitfield Co. Sheriff Dept. et al
as 4:2022cv00076
Plaintiff:
Samuel Dean Pendergrass
Defendant:
Whitfield Co. Sheriff Dept., Sheriff Scott Chitwood, Judge Cindy Morris and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morris v. Tactical Squad Ofc. Sharpe et al
as 3:2022cv00001
Plaintiff:
David W. Morris, Sr.
Defendant:
Tactical Squad Ofc. Sharpe and Officer Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morris v. Bobbitt et al
as 6:2021cv00090
Plaintiff:
David W. Morris, Sr.
Defendant:
Warden Bobbitt, Unit Manager Efferson, Sergeant Dilihunt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shaw v. Ward et al
as 4:2021cv00243
Plaintiff:
Dexter Shaw
Defendant:
Timothy Ward, Robert Toole, Johnny Sikes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Chisholm v. Morris
as 4:2021cv00351
Plaintiff:
Phillip Michael Chisholm
Defendant:
Judge Morris
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bennett v. Southern Correctional Medicine et al
as 5:2021cv00073
Plaintiff:
Richard Morris Bennett, III
Defendant:
Southern Correctional Medicine, Doyle Wooten, Fred Cole and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICKS v. MANTLE
as 5:2021cv00409
Plaintiff:
MORRIS RICKS
Defendant:
KENNETH MANTLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MORRIS v. COUNTRYMAN
as 4:2021cv00196
Plaintiff:
DUANE EDWARDS MORRIS
Defendant:
Sheriff GREG COUNTRYMAN
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.
