Cases 31 - 40 of 571
Kelvin Miles v. William Barr, et al
as 22-5110
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Kelvin J. Miles
Defendant / Appellee:
William Barr, John D. Ashcroft, Alberto R. Gonzales and others
Michael Leach v. DC, et al
as 22-7062
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Michael Leach
Defendant / Appellee:
District of Columbia, John Bewley, Officer; in his individual capacity, Christina Laury, Officer; in her individual capacity and others
MORGAN v. UNITED STATES
as 1:2022cv01060
Petitioner:
DAVID BRIAN MORGAN
Respondent:
UNITED STATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WATTLETON v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2022cv00545
Plaintiff:
DAVID EARL WATTLETON
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRIS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2022cv00342
Plaintiff:
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and MEDICAL STAFF FOR THE BUREAU OF PRISONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WATTLETON v. U.S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
as 1:2022cv00145
Plaintiff:
DAVID EARL WATTLETON
Defendant:
U.S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
CRAWFORD v. WEST TENNESSEE DETENTION FACILITY et al
as 1:2022cv00113
Plaintiff:
DEMARCUS DEON CRAWFORD
Defendant:
WEST TENNESSEE DETENTION FACILITY, HUGH HARVEY, JR., JODY S. PICKENS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RUDOMETKIN v. WORMUTH
as 1:2021cv03203
Petitioner:
DAVID J. RUDOMETKIN
Respondent:
CHRISTINE WORMUTH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv02624
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv02554
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
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.
