Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Strong v. Dallas County Commission et al
as 2:2024cv00105
Defendant:
Elizabeth Daniels, Dallas County Commission, Dallas County Sheriff's Department and others
Plaintiff:
Denise Strong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
DIXON v. JONES et al
as 4:2023cv00003
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK DOUGLAS DIXON
Defendant:
Warden JONES, JONES, MOHAMMED and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cullen v. Jackson
as 5:2022cv05213
Plaintiff:
John Patrick Cullen
Defendant:
Warden Moses Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
SHERMAN v. JAMES et al
as 4:2022cv00095
Petitioner:
SCOTTY LEE SHERMAN, JR
Respondent:
Warden MOSES JAMES and BAINBRIDGE PROBATION SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT CENTER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sherman v. James et al
as 1:2022cv01884
Petitioner:
Scotty Lee Sherman, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden Moses James and Bainbridge Probation Substance Abuse Treatment Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
White v. CCS Staff et al
as 6:2019cv06064
Defendant:
Records Supervisor Lynn Taylor, Deputy Warden Moses Jackson, III, Grievance Officer Lesa Haynes and others
Plaintiff:
Clifford Lee White, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
White v. Jackson et al
as 6:2019cv06065
Defendant:
Records Supervisor Lynn Taylor, Deputy Warden Moses Jackson, III, Grievance Officer Lesa Haynes and others
Plaintiff:
Clifford Lee White, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
James Roudabush, Jr. v. Warden Mosely
as 19-6106
Respondent:
DR. PESTO, RICHARD BURR and LINDSEY GRAHAM
Petitioner / Appellant:
JAMES LESTER ROUDABUSH, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN MOSELY
Roudabush v. Burrell et al
as 8:2018cv01984
Petitioner:
James L Roudabush, Jr
Respondent:
Dr Pesto, Richard Burr, Warden Mosely and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
