Cases 21 - 30 of 571
Thomas v. Fisher et al
as 5:2023cv01006
Plaintiff:
Frank Thomas
Defendant:
Ross Fisher, Mark Knutson, Cheri Atkinson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davison v Harpe
as 4:2023cv00456
Petitioner:
Alonzo G Davison
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00929
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Trotter v. Harpe
as 6:2023cv00348
Petitioner:
Jared M Trotter and Jared M. Trotter
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lasley v. Harpe
as 4:2023cv00446
Petitioner:
Tori Lynn Lasley
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Castleman v. Stitt et al
as 5:2023cv00919
Plaintiff:
Mark Wayne Castleman
Defendant:
Kevin Stitt, Steven Harpe, David Rogers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ferrell v. Harpe
as 4:2023cv00441
Petitioner:
Johnny Van Ferrell, Jr
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Martin v. Department of Corrections et al
as 5:2023cv00912
Plaintiff:
Anthony Lee Martin
Defendant:
Department of Corrections, Steven Harpe, Mark Knutson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Deluna v. Harpe
as 5:2023cv00890
Petitioner:
Luke E Deluna
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Weinert v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2023cv00330
Plaintiff:
Steven Alexander Weinert
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, Attorney General, Pushmataha County Sheriff's Department 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.
