Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Cleveland Johnson v. Christopher Epps, Commissioner, et al
as 20-60351
Defendant / Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER B. EPPS, COMMISSIONER, MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and SHANNON WARNOCK, Parole Board Chairman of the Department of Corrections
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CLEVELAND E. JOHNSON
Johnson v. Epps et al
as 3:2017cv00856
Plaintiff:
Cleveland E. Johnson
Defendant:
Christopher B. Epps and Shannon Warnock
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hayes v. Mississippi Legislature et al
as 3:2015cv00923
Plaintiff:
Michael Anthony Hayes
Defendant:
Mississippi Legislature, Mississippi Department of Corrections, Unknown Gipson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mangum v. Warnock et al
as 3:2014cv00575
Plaintiff:
Gerald Lee Mangum
Defendant:
Shannon Warnock, Bobbie Thomas, Clarence Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Levonzel Anderson v. Shannon Warnock, et al
as 13-60435
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LEVONZEL ANDERSON
Defendant - Appellee:
SHANNON WARNOCK, EMMIT SPARKMAN, BARTLEY GRIMES and others
Corley v. Epps et al
as 4:2012cv00088
Petitioner:
Randy Scott Corley
Respondent:
Christopher Epps, Lora Cole, Jerry Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Corley v. Epps et al
as 3:2012cv00482
Plaintiff:
Randy Scott Corley
Defendant:
Christopher Epps, Lora Cole, Jerry Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv00452
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sephus v. Miss. Dept. of Corrections et al
as 3:2011cv00658
Plaintiff:
Stephen Michael Sephus
Defendant:
Miss. Dept. of Corrections, Christopher Epps, Gloria Perry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mason v. Warnock et al
as 3:2011cv00625
Plaintiff:
Lawrence O. Mason
Defendant:
Shannon Warnock, Margaret Bingham, Michelle Taylor 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.
