Cases 31 - 40 of 40
Ellis v. NH Department of Corrections, Commissioner
as 1:2009cv00276
Petitioner:
Charles Ellis
Respondent:
NH Department of Corrections, Commissioner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Price v. McWilliam, et al
as 09-1746
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ELLIS PRICE
Defendant - Appellee:
BONNEY MCWILLIAM, HECTOR LOPEZ, JOHN ACKEL and others
Defendant:
BRIDGET M. SABA, KATHLEEN DENNEHY and ALLISON HALLET
Ruston v. Hardy, et al
as 09-1032
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LESTER JON RUSTON
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID HARDY, JAMES K. ELLIS, E. DANIELLE ALEMAN and others
Price v. MacEachern
as 1:2008cv11865
Petitioner:
Ellis Price
Respondent:
Duane MacEachern
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Proverb v. Hillsborough County Department of Corrections, Superintendent et al
as 1:2008cv00431
Plaintiff:
David R. Proverb
Defendant:
Hillsborough County Department of Corrections, Superintendent, William Scurry, FNU Duclose and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Ellis v. Gary Roden, Superintendent of NCCI Gardner
as 1:2007cv12380
Petitioner:
Christopher A Ellis
Respondent:
Gary Roden
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Ruston v. United States of America et al
as 4:2007cv40238
Plaintiff:
Lester Jon Ruston
Defendant:
United States of America, James K. Ellis, Tom Schneider and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
Price v. McWilliam et al
as 1:2007cv11507
Plaintiff:
Ellis Price
Defendant:
Bonney McWilliam, Hector Lopez, John Ackel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dixon v. Antilus et al
as 1:2007cv00248
Plaintiff:
Marc Dixon
Defendant:
George Antilus, David Archambault, Michael Cooper and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ellis v. Marshall
as 1:2001cv12147
Petitioner:
Sean K. Ellis
Respondent:
John Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
