Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Barnett v. Gaberiel et al
as 5:2026cv01914
Plaintiff:
Christopher J Barnett
Defendant:
Brandy Gaberiel, FNU Roper and FNU Barnes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 26-6110
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Barnett v. Sharp
as 4:2026cv00313
Petitioner:
Christopher J Barnett
Respondent:
Tommy Sharp
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barnett v. Frech et al
as 5:2026cv00978
Plaintiff:
Christopher J Barnett
Defendant:
FNU Frech, FNU Vasquez, Don Frech and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barnett v. Davis
as 5:2026cv00867
Petitioner:
Christopher J Barnett
Respondent:
Kelly Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barnett v. Pfaff, et al
as 26-7030
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER J. BARNETT
Defendant:
SETH PFAFF, Delta Unit Manager in his individual and personal capacity, C/O UNDERWOOD, Deputy warden - individual and personal capacity, JOHNSON, Deputy warden - individual and personal capacity and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01122
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Barnett v. Dunkley et al
as 1:2026cv00049
Plaintiff:
Joshua Lee Barnett
Defendant:
Cara Ann Dunkley, D. Chad Jensen, Hayden D Wallentine and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Barnett v. Tinsley
as 4:2026cv00148
Petitioner:
Christopher J Barnett
Defendant:
Scott Tinsley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Indy Vapes LLC et al v. Kobach et al
as 2:2026cv02120
Plaintiff:
McHempire LLC doing business as Abilene Vape and CBD and Indy Vapes LLC
Defendant:
Kris Kobach, Tony Mattivi, Melissa Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
