Cases 11 - 20 of 879
Duarte v. N.C.S.O et al
as 1:2024cv10643
Plaintiff:
Eric J Duarte
Defendant:
N.C.S.O, Sheriff Patrick W. McDermott, Superintendent Danielle Frane and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Montrond v. Divris
as 4:2024cv40032
Petitioner:
Pedro Montrond
Respondent:
Superintendent Matthew J. Divris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00053
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv10413
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1151
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Interested Party:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1119
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Shiner v. Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center
as 1:2024cv10100
Petitioner:
Dominic Shiner
Respondent:
Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv10109
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Morrison v. Superintendent MCI Shirley
as 1:2024cv10057
Petitioner:
Maurice Morrison
Respondent:
Superintendent MCI Shirley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cotto, et al v. Campbell, et al
as 23-2069
Plaintiff:
STACY FOSTER, On behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, JAMIE KIMBALL, On behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, JONATHAN RILEY, On behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated and others
Defendant:
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, ANDREA J. CAMPBELL, Attorney General, TIMOTHY SHUGRUE, Berkshire County District Attorney and others
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.
