Cases 11 - 20 of 76
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv01371
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HARRIS v. SAMUELS et al
as 1:2016cv01012
Plaintiff:
DONTE ROLANDO HARRIS
Defendant:
CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR., DUNBAR, JOHN & JANE DOES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
James Roudabush, Jr. v. Charles Samuels, Jr., et al
as 16-5114
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Charles E. Samuels, Jr., J. Hollingsworth, Bittner, LT. and others
James Roudabush, Jr. v. Karen Ripple, et al
as 16-5097
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Karen Ripple, Fed. Probation Ofc., Intake Counsel, D.C. Bar Assn., Supervisor, Fed. Probation Office and others
James Roudabush, Jr. v. C. Dynan, et al
as 16-5092
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
C. Dynan, Assistant Warden, J. Hollingsworth, Warden, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Director, F-BOP and others
James Roudabush, Jr. v. Hylton, et al
as 16-5062
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Hylton, CDUSM, Proctor, Deputy U.S. Marshal, Anderson, D/S and others
HAZEL v. SAMUELS
as 1:2016cv00543
Petitioner:
BOBBY E. HAZEL
Respondent:
CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
MALLOY v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
as 1:2016cv00287
Petitioner:
GERALD J. MALLOY
Respondent:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
GORDON v. SAMUELS
as 1:2016cv00037
Petitioner:
MICHAEL LEE GORDON
Respondent:
CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Prince Isaac v. Charles Samuels, Jr.
as 15-5329
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Prince Isaac
Defendant - Appellee:
Charles E. Samuels, Jr., In his capacity as Director, Bureau of Prisons
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.
