Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Derrick v. Owens et al
as 6:2015cv00599
Plaintiff:
Robert Derrick
Defendant:
Rissie Owens, Madeline M. Ortiz, William Stephens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hood v. Owens et al
as 6:2015cv00597
Plaintiff:
S Hood
Defendant:
Rissie Owens, Madeline M. Ortiz, William Stephens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Valdez v. Owens et al
as 6:2015cv00598
Plaintiff:
Jesse Valdez
Defendant:
Rissie Owens, Madeline M. Ortiz, William Stephens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Owens et al
as 6:2015cv00600
Plaintiff:
Roderick Williams
Defendant:
Rissie Owens, Madeline M. Ortiz, William Stephens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Emerson v. Owens et al
as 6:2015cv00601
Plaintiff:
Christopher J Emerson
Defendant:
Rissie Owens, Madeline M. Ortiz, William Stephens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hall et al v. Owens et al
as 6:2015cv00010
Plaintiff:
Phillip Hall and Christopher J Emerson
Defendant:
Rissie Owens, Madeline M. Ortiz, William Stephens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Damon Wood v. TDCJ - Rehabilitation, et al
as 10-40532
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAMON LEE WOOD
Defendant - Appellee:
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE REHABILITATION & RE-ENTRY PROGRAM, MADELINE M. ORTIZ, Director - Rehab Programs Division, JOSEPH A. BON-JORNO, Sex Offender Rehab Programs Manager and others
Wood v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Rehabilitation & Re-Entry Program
as 9:2010cv00022
Defendant:
Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Rehabilitation & Re-Entry Program, Madeline M. Ortiz, Joseph A. Bon-Jorno and others
Plaintiff:
Damon Lee Wood
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jones v. Ortiz et al
as 4:2007cv01877
Plaintiff:
Calvin Jones
Defendant:
Madeline M Ortiz, Mark Jones, Angela N Warner and others
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.
