U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 6,470
Bingham v. United States of America et al
as 1:2025cv00069
Plaintiff:
Curtis James Bingham
Defendant:
United States of America, Bradley County Tennessee, Bradley County Sheriff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tate v. United States of America
as 1:2025cv00060
Petitioner:
Raymond Tate
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Allen v. USA
as 1:2025cv00062
Petitioner:
Leslie D Allen
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Benfield v. Patterson
as 2:2025cv00040
Plaintiff:
Chad Anthony Benfield
Defendant:
Matthew Patterson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rogers v. Federal B.O.P. et al
as 1:2025cv00059
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Rogers
Defendant:
Federal B.O.P., C. Harrison, McDaniel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gilmore v. USA
as 3:2025cv00072
Petitioner:
Kedaris T. Gilmore
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Turner v. USA
as 3:2025cv00073
Petitioner:
Alim Turner
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Couch v. Crass et al
as 1:2025cv00049
Plaintiff:
Lamar Couch
Defendant:
Chet O. Crass, K. Hordbrock and Shawn Phillips
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
King v. Anderson County Detention Facility et al
as 3:2025cv00066
Plaintiff:
Timothy Shane King
Defendant:
Anderson County Detention Facility, Southern Health Partners, Sgnt. Minor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harper v. Jenkins et al
as 3:2025cv00060
Plaintiff:
Tevin Lamar Harper
Defendant:
C. Jenkins, Tom Spangler and Roger D. Wilson Detention Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
