Cases 1 - 10 of 16
David v. Hood et al
as 3:2023cv04579
Plaintiff:
Lewis Albertus David
Defendant:
Honorable Robert E. Hood, Honorable Bentley Price, Honorable Walton J. McLeod and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bryant v. South Carolina, State of et al
as 4:2023cv02601
Plaintiff:
Odom Bryant
Defendant:
South Carolina, State of, Public Defender's Office, Dean Mureddu and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Gilbert v. Hood et al
as 9:2022cv04470
Plaintiff:
Stephon Gilbert
Defendant:
Robert E. Hood, Tammie M. Pope and SCDC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Dizzley v. McBride et al
as 3:2021cv01941
Defendant:
Jeanette W. McBride and Robert E. Hood
Plaintiff:
Terron Dizzley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Hood et al
as 6:2019cv01702
Defendant:
Judge Harwell, B Stirling, J W McBride and others
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
King v. South Carolina, State of et al
as 5:2019cv00010
Defendant:
Solicitor David Pascoe, Judge James Williams, South Carolina, State of and others
Plaintiff:
Eugene King
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rowland v. Hood et al
as 9:2017cv02897
Plaintiff:
Joseph Todd Rowland
Defendant:
Robert E Hood, Tara Dawn Shurling, Judge Diaz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Muquit v. Hood et al
as 8:2017cv01804
Plaintiff:
Yahya Muquit
Defendant:
Robert E Hood, Tara Dawn Shurling, Judge Diaz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wilson v. Hood
as 1:2017cv01468
Petitioner:
Christopher Darnell Wilson
Respondent:
Robert E. Hood and Warden McFadden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Mitchell et al v. Hood et al
as 5:2017cv01363
Plaintiff:
Robert Mitchell, Lawrence L Crawford, Anthony Cook and others
Defendant:
Robert E Hood, Tara Dawn Shurling, Judge Diaz and others
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.
