Cases 11 - 20 of 89
Smith v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole
as 7:2016cv00213
Petitioner:
Rodney Smith
Respondent:
Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Trammell v. Tennessee State of et al
as 3:2016cv00756
Plaintiff:
Scott E. Trammell
Defendant:
Tennessee State of, Herbert H. Slatery, III, Tennessee Department of Correction and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wright v. Probation and Parole Board
as 2:2016cv00077
Plaintiff:
Norman F Wright
Defendant:
Probation and Parole Board
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Christopher Johnson v. TN, et al
as 16-5306
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER A. JOHNSON
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF TENNESSEE, TENNESSEE BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, MARK GWEN, Director and others
Johnson v. Hamilton County, Tennessee et al
as 1:2016cv00021
Plaintiff:
Christopher Anton Johnson
Defendant:
Hamilton County, Tennessee, Jim Hammond, State of Tennessee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. State of Tennessee et al
as 1:2016cv00022
Plaintiff:
Christopher Anton Johnson
Defendant:
State of Tennessee, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Mark Gwen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wade v. TN Board of Probation and Parole
as 3:2015cv01120
Plaintiff:
Dustin Lee Wade
Defendant:
TN Board of Probation and Parole
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. State of Tennessee et al
as 1:2015cv00131
Plaintiff:
Christopher Anton Johnson
Defendant:
State of Tennessee, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Mark Gwen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harris v. Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole
as 1:2015cv01128
Plaintiff:
Keith D. Harris
Defendant:
Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Beecham v. Benton County Jail et al
as 1:2015cv01127
Plaintiff:
Joshua Norman Beecham
Defendant:
Benton County Jail, Tennessee Dept of Corrections and Tennessee Dept of Probation and Parole
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.
