Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Byrd v. Fitz
as 3:2023cv00067
Petitioner:
George John Byrd
Respondent:
State of TN, Dept of Corrections and Johnny Fitz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cage v. TN Dept of Correction
as 3:2020cv00792
Plaintiff:
Quinton Cage
Defendant:
TN Dept of Correction and Deberry Special Needs Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Townsend v. TN Dept of Corrections
as 1:2020cv01172
Defendant:
TN Dept of Corrections
Plaintiff:
Alfonzo Townsend
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Satterfield v. TN Dept of Corrections et al
as 3:2019cv00254
Plaintiff:
Anthony Pringle Satterfield
Defendant:
Loudon County Sheriff's Dept, Loudon County Jail and TN Dept of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hughes v. TN. Dept. of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv01306
Plaintiff:
Martin E. Hughes
Defendant:
TN Dept of Corrections, Derrick Schofield, Corrections Corp. of America and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hughes v. TN. Dept. of Corrections et al
as 3:2015cv01488
Plaintiff:
Martin E. Hughes
Defendant:
TN. Dept. of Corrections, Derrick Schofield, Corrections Corp. of America and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wilson v. Schofield et al
as 3:2015cv00735
Plaintiff:
Charles Wilson
Defendant:
Derrick Schofield, TN Dept of Corrections Health Dept. and Centurion, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kilgore v. Steward et al
as 1:2015cv01049
Plaintiff:
George G. Kilgore, II
Defendant:
Henry Steward, TN Dept of Correction, J. Gillahan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kilgore v. Steward et al
as 3:2015cv00152
Plaintiff:
George G. Kilgore, II
Defendant:
Henry Steward, TN Dept of Correction, J. Gillahan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bennett v. Jackson et al
as 3:2014cv02024
Plaintiff:
Corey Alan Bennett
Defendant:
H. Jackson, TN Dept of Corrections Investigations/Compliance Unit, Terrence Williams 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.
