US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 21 - 30 of 19,046
ORR v. ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES et al
as 2:2024cv00161
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ORR
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, BUTLER, FRANK VANIHEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PRATT v. USA
as 4:2024cv00058
Petitioner:
SHAWNDRAE R. PRATT
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
TISHNER v. PENDLETON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 1:2024cv00724
Petitioner:
JOSHUA W. TISHNER
Respondent:
PENDLETON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SAMS v. PRETORIOUS
as 2:2024cv00160
Petitioner:
RAYMOND D. SAMS
Respondent:
TRICIA PRETORIOUS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JEWEL v. KNOX COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT. et al
as 2:2024cv00159
Plaintiff:
BRADLEY GENE JEWEL, JR.
Defendant:
KNOX COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT. and DOUG VANTLIN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BRASHEAR v. WARDEN (N.C.C.F.)
as 1:2024cv00727
Petitioner:
EDWARD BRASHEAR
Respondent:
WARDEN (N.C.C.F.)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BUCHANAN v. ALLEN
as 1:2024cv00719
Petitioner:
GERALD BUCHANAN
Respondent:
TRENT ALLEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CLARK v. PLATT et al
as 1:2024cv00710
Plaintiff:
GREGORY T. CLARK, II
Defendant:
CHAD PLATT, KEITH HARTZELL, PRETORIUS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STACY v. TEMPLE et al
as 1:2024cv00712
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM RICHARD STACY
Defendant:
DYLAN TEMPLE, TEMPLE, SANDERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STONE v. EMERSON et al
as 2:2024cv00157
Plaintiff:
JEREMY STONE
Defendant:
DONALD EMERSON, SNODGRASS, JOHN DOE and others
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.
