Cases 81 - 90 of 10,872
Christian v. United States of America
as 5:2024cv00353
Respondent:
United States of America
Petitioner:
James Cornelius Christian
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Purdy v. Harpe
as 5:2024cv00348
Petitioner:
Aaron C Purdy
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rowbotham v. Bridges
as 4:2024cv00151
Petitioner:
Roger D Rowbotham
Respondent:
Carrie Bridges
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Livingston v. Regalado
as 4:2024cv00153
Petitioner:
Aaron J Livingston
Respondent:
Vic Regalado
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Garcia v. Drummond
as 5:2024cv00341
Petitioner:
Harry Garcia
Respondent:
Gentner Drummond
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Fox v. Loman et al
as 5:2024cv00338
Plaintiff:
Kaci Fox
Defendant:
David Loman, Board of County Commissioners of the County of Canadian County, Oklahoma and Chris West, As Sheriff of Canadian County, State of Oklahoma, in his Official Capacity
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Spalding v. United States of America
as 5:2024cv00337
Petitioner:
David L Spalding
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Mendenhall v. Union City Community Corrections Center
as 5:2024cv00336
Plaintiff:
Jessie Mendenhall
Defendant:
Union City Community Corrections Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McDonald v. Lilly et al
as 5:2024cv00335
Plaintiff:
Alexis McDonald, Jr
Defendant:
Amanda Lilly, Garfield County Detention Center and Oklahoma State of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Romero v. Harpe et al
as 5:2024cv00325
Plaintiff:
Albert Andrew Romero
Defendant:
Steven Harpe, Susan Campbell and Robert Nogel
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.
