Cases 41 - 50 of 51
HOFLAND v. LAHAYE et al
as 1:2011cv00053
Plaintiff:
RANDALL B HOFLAND
Defendant:
RICHARD LAHAYE, JR, JESSICA DANIELSON, MICHAEL LARRIVEE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GOGUEN v. ROSS et al
as 1:2011cv00027
Plaintiff:
ROBERT FRED GOGUEN
Defendant:
WILLIAM GARDNER, MIKE PARODY, JASON RAYMOND and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WILLIAMS v. MAGNUSSON
as 1:2009cv00532
Petitioner:
RENARDO WILLIAMS
Respondent:
MARTIN A MAGNUSSON
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
BATER v. USA
as 2:2009cv00398
Petitioner:
WILLIAM F BATER
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
DENNIS v. LIBERTY et al
as 1:2009cv00373
Plaintiff:
ROD R DENNIS
Defendant:
RANDALL LIBERTY , FERREIRA, OFFICER , PEABODY, OFFICER and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
MCKENNEY v. COMMISSIONER, MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2009cv00157
Plaintiff:
ROBERT WILLIAM MCKENNEY
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER, MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WARDEN, MAINE STATE PRISON and CHARLIE CHARLTON
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
THUN v. MAINE
as 2:2009cv00085
Petitioner:
WILLIAM JOHN THUN
Respondent:
STATE OF MAINE
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
LELAND v. USA
as 1:2008cv00421
Petitioner:
WILLIAM LELAND
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
WILLIAMS et al v. MAINE COMMISSION ON GOVERNMENTAL ETHICS AND ELECTION PRACTICES et al
as 2:2007cv00158
Plaintiff:
JOMO WILLIAMS, JOMO K MANUAL WILLIAMS COMMITTEE and GOVERNMENT OF DIVINATION NATIONAL COMMITTEE
Defendant:
MAINE COMMISSION ON GOVERNMENTAL ETHICS AND ELECTION PRACTICES, JOHN DOE and JANE DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
THUN v. MAINE CORRECTIONAL CENTER, SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2007cv00139
Petitioner:
WILLIAM J THUN
Respondent:
MAINE CORRECTIONAL CENTER, SUPERINTENDENT
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.
