Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Burney v. United States of America
as 8:2021cv01879
Plaintiff:
Frederick James Burney, Jr.
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
SCHMIDT v. OKALOOSA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2020cv05806
Defendant:
OKALOOSA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CORIZON HEALTH SERVICES and OKALOOSA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK JAMES SCHMIDT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SCHMIDT v. DELGATO
as 3:2020cv05605
Defendant:
CORIZON HEALTH SERVICES, OCDOC, DELGATO and others
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK JAMES SCHMIDT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SCHMIDT v. ESMOND et al
as 3:2020cv04508
Defendant:
ROLLER, DELGATO and ESMOND
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK JAMES SCHMIDT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SCHMIDT v. OCDOC DIRECTOR
as 3:2019cv00551
Defendant:
OCDOC DIRECTOR, CORIZON HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS, LARRY ASHLEY and others
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK JAMES SCHMIDT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hill Nissan, Inc. v. Jenkins Nissan, Inc. et al
as 8:2011cv02757
Plaintiff:
Hill Nissan, Inc.
Defendant:
Jenkins Nissan, Inc., Frederick James Jenkins, Brian M. Fivecoat and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
Bryant v. United States of America
as 2:2010cv08031
Petitioner:
Frederick James Bryant
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
McKennie v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 8:2009cv01527
Petitioner:
Frederick James McKennie
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SCHMIDT v. GLIDWELL
as 3:2007cv00169
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK JAMES SCHMIDT
Defendant:
DANNY GLIDWELL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SCHMIDT v. BLACKENALL et al
as 3:2007cv00139
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK JAMES SCHMIDT
Defendant:
BLACKENALL and HUDSON
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.
