Cases 11 - 20 of 30
Mohammed v. Holder, et al
as 14-1325
Plaintiff - Appellee:
KHALFAN KHAMIS MOHAMMED
Defendant - Appellant:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., United States Attorney General, CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR., Director of Federal Bureau of Prisons, DAVID BERKEBILE, ADX Warden and others
Leon v. Robinson et al
as 1:2014cv02288
Plaintiff:
Raul Leon
Defendant:
Todd Robinson, Katie Harding, Allen Valklosky and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Buhl v. Rangel et al
as 1:2014cv02086
Plaintiff:
Leroy Buhl
Defendant:
Patricia Rangel, D. Berkebile, Bob Custard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kiderlen v. Samuels Jr.
as 1:2014cv00891
Petitioner:
Steven Kiderlen
Respondent:
Charles E. Samuels Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Garner v. Samuels et al
as 5:2014cv00089
Petitioner:
Markie Kenneth Garner
Respondent:
Charles E Samuels, Jr, Stacia A Hylton and Eric H Holder, Jr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Williams v. Fox
as 5:2013cv01280
Petitioner:
James Lee Williams, II
Respondent:
John B Fox, Charles E Samuels, Jr, J A Keller and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Pinson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2013cv03138
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Pinson
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Charles E. Samuels, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Spigelman v. Samuels et al
as 5:2013cv01138
Plaintiff:
Joel S Spigelman
Defendant:
Charles E Samuels, Jr, Paul A Kastner and Gooden
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stine v. Laird, et al
as 13-3265
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MIKEAL GLENN STINE
Defendant - Appellee:
PAUL LAIRD, Regional Director, AMBER NELSON, Senior Deputy Regional Director, GORDON HARPE, Regional Correctional Services Administrator and others
In re: Stine, et al
as 13-3257
Petitioner:
MIKEAL GLENN STINE
Respondent:
PAUL LAIRD, Regional Director, AMBER NELSON, Senior Deputy Regional Director, GORDON HARPE, Regional Correctional Services Administrator 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.
