Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Gunn v. McCallum et al
as 6:2023cv02115
Plaintiff:
Gregory L. Gunn
Defendant:
Warden David McCallum, Correctional Officer Jane Doe, Correctional Officer John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gunn v. McCallum et al
as 6:2023cv02106
Plaintiff:
Gregory Lanard Gunn, Jr.
Defendant:
David McCallum and Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lucius v. McCallum et al
as 6:2018cv00697
Plaintiff:
Fred Allen Lucius, Jr.
Defendant:
David McCallum and Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
D'AMICO v. CORIZON HEALTH SERVICES INC et al
as 4:2015cv00127
Plaintiff:
STEVEN F D'AMICO
Defendant:
CORIZON HEALTH SERVICES INC, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, VERNON MONTOYA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ASENCIO v. MCCALLUM
as 1:2015cv20783
Petitioner:
ORESTES JESUS ASENCIO
Respondent:
DAVID MCCALLUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
ASENCIO v. MCCALLUM
as 4:2015cv00079
Petitioner:
ORESTES JESUS ASENCIO
Respondent:
DAVID MCCALLUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
ROWAN v. CREWS et al
as 4:2014cv00572
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL E ROWAN
Defendant:
MICHAEL D CREWS, ALEX TAYLOR, D SCHEETZ, JR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CORDOVANO v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 4:2014cv00008
Plaintiff:
SALVATORE P CORDOVANO
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, NORTHWEST FLORIDA RECEPTION CENTER ANNEX, MICHAEL D CREWS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
REDDING v. SIMCOX
as 4:2013cv00408
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL REDDING
Defendant:
CATHY SIMCOX, A BUCURELLI, DAVID MCCALLUM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walker v. FL Attorney General et al
as 6:2008cv00015
Petitioner:
Charles B. Walker
Respondent:
FL Attorney General, Secretary, DOC and David McCallum
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
