Cases 91 - 100 of 572
Hull, Jr v. Centurion Detention Health Services et al
as 3:2020cv00367
Defendant:
Centurion Detention Health Services, Dr. ((f/n/u) Logan, Tennessee Department of Correction (NECX) and others
Plaintiff:
Clarence R. Hull, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. State of Tennessee Department of Correction et al
as 3:2020cv00340
Defendant:
Sonia Jones, State of Tennessee Board of Parole and Probation, Bledsoe County Correctional and others
Plaintiff:
Mario D. Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodgers v. Tennessee Department of Corrections
as 2:2020cv02280
Petitioner:
Frederick S. Rodgers
Respondent:
Tennessee Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Antwain Gatlin v. Brandon Hodges, et al
as 20-5234
Defendant / Appellee:
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, RANDY LEE and BRANDON HODGES, Corrections Officer
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANTWAIN GATLIN
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2020cv00276
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12131
Tan v. Tennessee Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2020cv00204
Defendant:
BCCX, Deberry Spnd, DCSO and others
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Tywon Tan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2020cv00188
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12131
Antwain Gatlin v. Brandon Hodges, et al
as 20-5088
Defendant / Appellee:
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, RANDY LEE and BRANDON HODGES, Corrections Officer
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANTWAIN GATLIN
Horton v. Washburn et al
as 3:2020cv00077
Defendant:
Washburn and Tennessee Department of Correction
Plaintiff:
Michael T. Horton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Horton v. Washburn et al
as 2:2020cv00015
Defendant:
Washburn and Tennessee Department of Correction
Plaintiff:
Michael T. Horton
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.
