US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 41 - 50 of 9,711
West v. Corizon, aka Tehum Care Services, Inc., et al
as 4:2023cv00154
Plaintiff:
Denny L West
Defendant:
Corizon, aka Tehum Care Services, Inc.,, John Doe, MD, Jane Doe 1-5 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Taylor v. Glasscock et al
as 4:2023cv00147
Plaintiff:
Brandon Taylor
Defendant:
John Glasscock and St. Louis County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Taylor v. Adams et al
as 4:2023cv00139
Plaintiff:
Leonard Taylor
Defendant:
Richard Adams and Ann Precythe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Evans v. Vincent
as 4:2023cv00132
Petitioner:
Bryson L. Evans
Respondent:
Felix Vincent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Buckner v. Shaffer et al
as 2:2023cv00004
Plaintiff:
Earnest L. Buckner
Defendant:
A. Shaffer, M. Golain, D. Austin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Miller v. Redington
as 2:2023cv00005
Petitioner:
Joseph Miller
Respondent:
Dan Redington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Marsh v. MO Dept. of Corr. et al
as 4:2023cv00128
Plaintiff:
Javon Dustin Marsh and Mr. Marsh
Defendant:
MO Dept. of Corr., Julia M. Boyer, Lucas R. Wells and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Roberts v. USA
as 4:2023cv00103
Petitioner:
Timothy Munro Roberts
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Rios-Rosa v. Hills et al
as 1:2023cv00014
Plaintiff:
Angel David Rios-Rosa
Defendant:
Nina Hills and Unknown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gatling v. USA
as 4:2023cv00079
Petitioner:
Dionne Lamont Gatling
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
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.
