Cases 11 - 20 of 71
Satchel v. Maddox
as 5:2022cv00232
Petitioner:
Johnny Ray Satchel, Jr.
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID and Gary Maddox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Gonzales v. Maddox
as 5:2022cv00233
Petitioner:
Louis Fred Gonzales
Respondent:
Gary Maddox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Gonzales v. United States
as 5:2022cv00225
Petitioner:
Louis Gonzales
Respondent:
United States and Gary Maddox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Couchman et al v. Callanen et al
as 5:2022cv00929
Plaintiff:
Heather Couchman, Rodney Landry, Jarrett Woodward and others
Defendant:
Jacquelyn Callanen, Nelson Wolff, Justin Rodriguez and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - 42:1983 Civil Rights
Welsh v. Williams et al
as 5:2022cv00183
Plaintiff:
Lonnie Kade Welsh
Defendant:
Brian Williams, Texas Civil Commitment Center, Julian Chavez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Downum v Aransas County Public Safety Center et al
as 2:2022cv00066
Plaintiff:
Christopher Joseph Downum, Jr
Defendant:
Aransas County Public Safety Center, Aransas/San Pat County/District Courts, Aransas County Detention Center and others
Petitioner:
Christopher Joseph
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Welsh v. Maddox
as 5:2021cv00562
Respondent:
NFN Maddox
Petitioner:
Lonnie Kade Welsh
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Welsh v. Maddox
as 5:2021cv00547
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin and NFN Maddox
Petitioner:
Lonnie Kade Welsh
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Welsh v. Bobby Lumpkin
as 5:2021cv00548
Respondent:
NFN Maddox and Bobby Lumpkin
Petitioner:
Lonnie Kade Welsh
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Welsh v. Maddox
as 5:2021cv00118
Respondent:
Sheriff NFN Maddox
Petitioner:
Lonnie Kade Welsh
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
