Cases 21 - 30 of 177
Spurlock v. Lumpkin
as 23-20062
Petitioner / Appellant:
Daphne Octavia Spurlock
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00095
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Spurlock v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv00570
Petitioner:
Daphne Octavia Spurlock
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Markwardt v. Spurlock et al
as 1:2022cv02945
Plaintiff:
MICHELLE MARKWARDT
Defendant:
SHERIFF TONY SPURLOCK, MORGAN STANTON, COURTNEY ANDERSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1988 - Proceedings in Vindication of Civil Rights
Aurit v. Owens et al
as 1:2022cv02912
Plaintiff:
Todd A. Aurit
Defendant:
Bill Owens, John Kellner, Kathleen McGuire and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Robinson v. Mosley et al
as 6:2022cv00211
Plaintiff:
Jerry Robinson
Defendant:
Jammie Mosley, Laurel County, APRN Chastity King and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00637
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stovall v. Gwathney et al
as 5:2022cv01110
Plaintiff:
Michael Leon Stovall
Defendant:
Leigh Gwathney, Darryl Littleton, Dwayne Spurlock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hollins v. Neihoff et al
as 3:2022cv01985
Plaintiff:
Derrick Hollins
Defendant:
Officer Neihoff, Mikeal and Warden Spurlock
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00347
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
