US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 21 - 30 of 3,892
D.W. v. United States Parole Commission et al
as 1:2024cv01870
Plaintiff:
D.W.
Defendant:
United States Parole Commission, Patricia K. Cushwa and Susan Randolph
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Phillips v. Edgcomb et al
as 1:2024cv01890
Petitioner:
Dezzan D Phillips
Respondent:
LaSalle County Jail and Jason Edgcomb
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson v. Jones
as 1:2024cv01657
Petitioner:
Sr. Lawrence L Jackson
Respondent:
Illinois River Correctional Center and Chance Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barry v. Farano et al
as 1:2024cv01418
Petitioner:
Marie Barry
Respondent:
Robert Farano
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Barry v. Fronckiel
as 1:2024cv01419
Petitioner:
Marie Barry
Respondent:
Luckasz Fronckiel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barry v. Gump
as 1:2024cv01417
Petitioner:
Marie Barry
Respondent:
Joseph M Gump
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Buckhana v. Truitt
as 1:2024cv01427
Petitioner:
William D. Buckhana
Respondent:
Charles Truitt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barry v. Lombardi
as 1:2024cv01415
Petitioner:
Marie Barry
Respondent:
Brandon Lombardi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
James v. Greene
as 1:2024cv01264
Petitioner:
Kevin James
Respondent:
Brittney Greene
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cochran v. Jones
as 1:2024cv01275
Petitioner:
Jeremiah Cochran
Respondent:
Cherryle Hinthorne and Chance Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
