Cases 41 - 50 of 79
Morgan v. Middlebrooks
as 1:2010cv20042
Plaintiff:
Daniel Morgan
Defendant:
Scott A. Middlebrooks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Castro v. Lappin et al
as 5:2009cv00504
Plaintiff:
Louis Castro
Defendant:
Harley G. Lappin, Scott A. Middlebrooks and Walter Francis Becker, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Cano v. Middlebrooks
as 5:2009cv00462
Plaintiff:
Luis H. Cano
Defendant:
Scott A. Middlebrooks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Davis v. Smith et al
as 5:2009cv00442
Plaintiff:
Matthew Davis
Defendant:
J. Smith, A. Figueroa and Scott A. Middlebrooks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
HARDEN v. HOLT et al
as 5:2009cv00320
Plaintiff:
Joseph Harden
Defendant:
Ray Holt, Scott A. Middlebrooks, K. BURTON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HILL v. MIDDLEBROOKS
as 5:2009cv00304
Petitioner:
Eric Rodney Hill
Respondent:
Scott A. Middlebrooks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Nolan v. Middlebrooks
as 1:2009cv01915
Petitioner:
Leroy Nolan
Respondent:
Scott A. Middlebrooks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Type:
Prisoner Petitions
HARDEN v. HOLT et al
as 1:2009cv01174
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH HARDEN
Defendant:
RAY HOLT, SCOTT A. MIDDLEBROOKS, K. BURTON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HILL v. MIDDLEBROOKS
as 1:2009cv01073
Petitioner:
ERIC RODNEY HILL
Respondent:
SCOTT A. MIDDLEBROOKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Kenney v. Middlebrooks et al
as 5:2009cv00254
Plaintiff:
John Charles Kenney
Defendant:
Scott A. Middlebrooks, K Rossi Burton, Dr. Proetta and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
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.
