Cases 41 - 50 of 91
Hunter v. United States Marshals Service, et al
as 11-1137
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARIAN HUNTER
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, CLEAR CREEK COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, TELLER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT and others
Jordan v. Wiley, et al
as 10-1549
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK JORDAN
Defendant - Appellee:
R. WILEY, Warden, ADX Florence, H. LAPPIN, Director, Bureau of Prisons and BUREAU OF PRISONS
Jordan v. U.S. Department of Justice, et al
as 10-1469
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK JORDAN
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Gillon v. The Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al
as 10-1425
Plaintiff - Appellant:
INGMAR GILLON
Defendant - Appellee:
THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, WARDEN BLAKE DAVIS, US PENITENTIARY FLORENCE COLORADO and others
Stine v. Lappin, et al
as 10-1392
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MIKEAL GLENN STINE
Defendant - Appellee:
HARLEY LAPPIN, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and BLAKE DAVIS
Cohen v. Kraus, et al
as 10-1384
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SOLOMON B. COHEN
Defendant - Appellee:
DR. KRAUS, Medical Director, and and MR. IPPOLITO, HSA Federal Detention Facility/FCI, Bureau of Prisons
Pettus v. United States, et al
as 10-1379
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NAKIA PETTUS
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS and SARA M. REVELL
Riches v. Blahnik, et al
as 10-1367
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JONATHAN LEE RICHES
Defendant - Appellee:
MANOLO BLAHNIK, OLIVER PEOPLES, FIFI CHACHNIL and others
Stine v. Lappin, et al
as 10-1355
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MIKEAL GLENN STINE
Defendant - Appellee:
HARLEY LAPPIN, Director, US Federal Bureau of Prisons, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BLAKE DAVIS and others
Stine v. Davis, et al
as 10-1339
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MIKEAL GLENN STINE
Defendant - Appellee:
BLAKE DAVIS, Warden ADX, Florence and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
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.
