Cases 21 - 30 of 244
TUCKER v. JONES
as 3:2019cv01713
Defendant:
SANDLING SPEEDING, L PRESCOTT, GILEND SAENCES INC and others
Plaintiff:
WAYNE WILLIAM TUCKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Howe vs. Secretary, Department of Corrections, et al. (Pinellas County)
as 8:2019cv00750
Petitioner:
Daniel P. Howe
Respondent:
Attorney General, State of Florida, W.A. Loughery, Rick Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
HOWE v. LOUGHERY et al
as 4:2019cv00139
Respondent:
JULIE JONES, PAMELA JO BONDI, W A LOUGHERY and others
Petitioner:
DANIEL P HOWE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Coleman v. Scott et al
as 3:2019cv00318
Defendant:
B. Roberts, J. S. Edwards, Robert Andrews and others
Plaintiff:
Shaw Vale Coleman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
VAUGHAN v. CLARK et al
as 3:2019cv00493
Defendant:
JULIE JONES, NICK CLARK and RICK SCOTT
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM HENRY VAUGHAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Waugh v. Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2019cv20038
Defendant:
Rick Scott, Seller, Chaplain Bascom Smith and others
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Waugh
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bilal v. Kapusta et al
as 2:2019cv00008
Defendant:
Rebecca Kapusta, Donald Sawyer, Jeanine Cohen and others
Plaintiff:
Jamaal Ali Bilal and John L. Burton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Moore v. Jones et al
as 3:2018cv01457
Defendant:
Jeffrey McClellan, S. Johnson, John Doe and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony Lieture Moore and Sovereig King Yahweh
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Copeland v. Jones et al
as 1:2018cv24940
Plaintiff:
Shannon Copeland
Defendant:
Director Christopher Wray, U.S. Attorney General, Katherine Fernandez-Rundle and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RILEY v. SCOTT et al
as 4:2018cv00531
Respondent:
SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA, JULIE JONES and others
Petitioner:
LUKELY RILEY
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.
