Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Martin v. Busby
as 2:2023cv00139
Petitioner:
Daniel Neal Martin
Respondent:
Larry R Busby
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Martin v. Live Oak
as 23-40254
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Daniel Neal Martin
Defendant / Appellee:
Live Oak County Jail, Live Oak County Sheriffs Department, Cara Kay Joiner Barton and others
Martin v. Busby
as 23-40017
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Daniel Neal Martin
Defendant / Appellee:
Sheriff Larry Busby, Charlie Stroleny, Chief Deputy, Deputy Nowlan and others
Martin v. Busby
as 22-40725
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Daniel Neal Martin
Defendant / Appellee:
Sheriff Larry Busby, Charlie Stroleny, Chief Deputy, Deputy Nowlan and others
Martin v. Live Oak County Jail
as 2:2022cv00260
Plaintiff:
Daniel Neal Martin
Defendant:
Live Oak County Jail, Daniel Coban Barton, Jailer Perry and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Martin v. Busby et al
as 2:2022cv00181
Plaintiff:
Daniel Neal Martin
Defendant:
Sheriff Larry Busby, Charlie Stroleny, Deputy Nowlan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Martin v. Live Oak County Jail et al
as 2:2022cv00156
Defendant:
Daniel Coban Barton, Live Oak County Jail, Live Oak County Sheriffs Dept and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel Neal Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Martin v. Social Security Administration
as 2:2020cv01610
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Plaintiff:
Timothy Martin and Timothy Neal Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv02101
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
BAXTER v. MARTIN et al
as 2:2017cv00117
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER A. BAXTER
Defendant:
SAMUEL BYRD, KIMBERLY HOBSON, CARL KUENZLI and others
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
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.
