Cases 21 - 30 of 157
Johnson v. Rumph, et al
as 23-1028
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JABARI J. JOHNSON
Defendant / Appellee:
RUMPH, PAPPAY, FLORES and others
Johnson v. Rumph et al
as 1:2022cv03319
Plaintiff:
Jabri J. Johnson and Jabari J. Johnson
Defendant:
Rumph, Pappay, Flores and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Buitimea v. Quik et al
as 1:2022cv02981
Plaintiff:
Julio Flores Buitimea
Defendant:
Dusty Quik and Jared Iungerich
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Flores Alvarez v. Warden et al
as 1:2022cv00835
Plaintiff:
Rodolfo Flores Alvarez
Defendant:
FNU Warden, Marie Jackson, Anna Padilla and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Grado v. The GEO Group, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv00713
Plaintiff:
Gabriel H. Grado
Defendant:
The GEO Group, Inc., J. Flores, J. Puente and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Flores v. Jefferson County Courts et al
as 1:2022cv02503
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Flores
Defendant:
Jefferson County Courts and Jefferson County Pretrial
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Meckelburg et al
as 1:2022cv00669
Plaintiff:
Jabari Johnson
Defendant:
FNU Meckelburg, FNU Deloacn, FNU Norris and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Veyhle v. Cressman et al
as 1:2022cv02054
Plaintiff:
Gene Neyhle and Gene Veyhle
Defendant:
Mark Cressman, Kevin Flores, Sierra Galindo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Flores v. USA
as 2:2022cv00542
Petitioner:
Ruben Flores
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Bateast (ID 118348) v. Orunsolu et al
as 5:2022cv03093
Plaintiff:
Damian M. Bateast
Defendant:
Oluwatosin S. Orunsolu, Adam D. Knapp, Malty J. Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
