D.C. Circuit Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 81 - 90 of 346
James Roudabush, Jr. v. Charles Samuels, Jr., et al
as 16-5114
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Charles E. Samuels, Jr., J. Hollingsworth, Bittner, LT. and others
James Roudabush, Jr. v. C. Dynan, et al
as 16-5092
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
C. Dynan, Assistant Warden, J. Hollingsworth, Warden, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Director, F-BOP and others
DERRINGTON v. D.C. D.O.C.
as 1:2016cv00648
Plaintiff:
MARQUELL ALONZO DERRINGTON
Defendant:
D.C. D.O.C.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CARTER v. FCI FORT DIX MEDICAL DIRECTOR et al
as 1:2016cv00612
Plaintiff:
CURTIS CARTER
Defendant:
FCI FORT DIX MEDICAL DIRECTOR, FCI FORT DIX MEDICAL WARDEN and FBOP NE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dennis Watkins v. Benjamin Lawsky, et al
as 16-7030
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Dennis Watkins
Defendant - Appellee:
Benjamin Lawsky, Superintendent and Harold D. Graham, Superintendent
Ernest Greely, Jr. v. A. Burgess, Jr.
as 16-7028
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Ernest M. Greely, Jr., also known as Ernest M. Greely-Bey
Defendant - Appellee:
A. Franklin Burgess, Jr., Associate Judge. District of Columbia Superior Court
RUSSELL v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2016cv00459
Plaintiff:
COREY FERNANDO RUSSELL
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and U.S. MARSHAL'S SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MITCHELL v. HOLLIDAY et al
as 1:2016cv00444
Plaintiff:
WALLACE MITCHELL
Defendant:
MITCHEL HOLLIDAY , CHARLES SAMUELS and DONALD LEWIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Michael Royster v. Glunt
as 16-7014
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Michael Royster
Defendant - Appellee:
Glunt, WARDEN
WATKINS v. LAWSKY et al
as 1:2016cv00088
Plaintiff:
DENNIS WATKINS
Defendant:
BENJAMIN LAWSKY and HAROLD D. GRAHAM
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.
