US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 91 - 100 of 10,042
WOODBERRY v. MICHAEL et al
as 1:2024cv00231
Plaintiff:
MANDRAIL JAMAR WOODBERRY
Defendant:
JUDGE MICHAEL, JOHN BANDLE, M. ODOM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SPRAUVE v. UNKNOWN OFFICIALS AT DURHAM COUNTY DETENTION CENTER
as 1:2024cv00226
Plaintiff:
JON C. SPRAUVE
Defendant:
UNKNOWN OFFICIALS AT DURHAM COUNTY DETENTION CENTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILSON v. DAVIDSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE et al
as 1:2024cv00219
Plaintiff:
SUSAN WILSON
Defendant:
DAVIDSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, DAVIDSON COUNTY, RICHIE T. SIMMONS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HYDE v. USA
as 1:2024cv00222
Petitioner:
MASON WHITE HYDE
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
HICKMAN v. USA
as 1:2024cv00223
Petitioner:
STEPHANIE JANE HICKMAN
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
RAMIREZ-BARRERA v. USA
as 1:2024cv00210
Petitioner:
JESUS RAMIREZ-BARRERA
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
WILLIAMSON v. USA
as 1:2024cv00212
Petitioner:
RODNEY ANTON WILLIAMSON
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
MCGILL v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY
as 1:2024cv00206
Petitioner:
MELISSA GRIFFIN MCGILL
Respondent:
MONTGOMERY COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BROWNING v. MECKLENBURG COUNTY et al
as 1:2024cv00209
Plaintiff:
PIERRE BROWNING
Defendant:
MECKLENBURG COUNTY and DAVID LANGE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RENZI v. NAPHCARE, INC. et al
as 1:2024cv00211
Plaintiff:
JENNIFER RENZI
Defendant:
NAPHCARE, INC., BOBBY F. KIMBROUGH, JR., BRIAN L. GILROY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Wrongful Death
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.
