Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Pemberton v. Harpe
as 6:2023cv00025
Petitioner:
Paul Curtis Pemberton
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
United States v. Pemberton
as 22-7028
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
PAUL CURTIS PEMBERTON
Pemberton v. Patton, et al
as 15-6129
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PAUL CURTIS PEMBERTON
Defendant - Appellee:
ROBERT C. PATTON, New Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections Substitute, in his official capacity, MARY FALLIN, Governor of the State of Oklahoma, in her official capacity only, JUSTIN JONES, Individuall and as Past Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and others
Pemberton v. Patton, et al
as 15-6089
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PAUL CURTIS PEMBERTON
Defendant - Appellee:
ROBERT C. PATTON, New Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections Substitute, in his official capacity, MARY FALLIN, Governor of the State of Oklahoma, in her official capacity only, JUSTIN JONES, Individuall and as Past Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and others
Pemberton v. Patton et al
as 5:2014cv00129
Plaintiff:
Paul Curtis Pemberton
Defendant:
Robert C Patton, Justin Jones, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Pemberton
as 11-6184
Petitioner:
PAUL CURTIS PEMBERTON
Respondent:
JUSTIN JONES, OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, OKLAHOMA STATE REFORMATORY and others
Pemberton v. Jones, et al
as 11-6138
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PAUL CURTIS PEMBERTON
Defendant - Appellee:
JUSTIN JONES, Director DOC, JAMES RUDEK, Warden, OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
In re: Pemberton
as 11-6034
Petitioner:
PAUL CURTIS PEMBERTON
Respondent:
JUSTIN JONES, JAMES RUDEK, OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
Pemberton v. Jones et al
as 5:2010cv00966
Plaintiff:
Paul Curtis Pemberton
Defendant:
Justin Jones and James Rudek
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.
