Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Hunter v. Lucas County et al.
as 3:2024cv00316
Plaintiff:
Olivia Hunter
Defendant:
Lucas County, Correction Center of Northwest Ohio, Corrections Commission of Northwest Ohio and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Davis v. Laffrey et al
as 2:2023cv00935
Plaintiff:
Gerald Maurice Davis
Defendant:
Brian Laffrey, Piper Sessions, Rachel Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cunningham v. Department of Corrections State of Washington et al
as 4:2017cv05087
Plaintiff:
Aaron Joseph Cunningham
Defendant:
Department of Corrections State of Washington, Casey Potts, G Robinson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hale v. State of Tennessee et al
as 1:2016cv00422
Plaintiff:
Thomas Daniel Eugene Hale
Defendant:
Tennessee State of, Bert Boyd, Darren L. Settles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hale v. State of Tennessee et al
as 3:2016cv00159
Plaintiff:
Thomas D. Hale
Defendant:
State of Tennessee, Bert Boyd, Darren L. Settles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sutton v. Washington State Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2015cv05123
Plaintiff:
Jason Lee Sutton
Defendant:
Washington State Department of Corrections, Bernard Warner, Robert Herzog and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rachel Smith v. William Stephens, Director
as 15-41005
Petitioner - Appellant:
RACHEL SMITH
Respondent - Appellee:
WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Smith v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2014cv00471
Petitioner:
Rachel Smith
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Stephens
as 6:2014cv00307
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Petitioner:
Rachel Smith
Respondent:
William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
