Cases 1 - 10 of 10
RANDOLPH v. USA
as 1:2021cv02855
Petitioner:
RONALD RANDOLPH
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
MAYS v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2020cv02197
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH RANDOLPH MAYS
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and OFFICE OF INFORMATION POLICY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
WALKER et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 1:2019cv02769
Plaintiff:
VICTOR JOHNSON, KENNETH WATKINS, JERICUO MISSOURI and others
Defendant:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WEAVER v. RUSSELL et al
as 1:2018cv00961
Plaintiff:
JUSTIN D. WEAVER
Defendant:
MICHAEL D. RUSSELL, RANDOLPH W. SAWYER, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LASHER v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al
as 1:2017cv01746
Plaintiff:
LENA LASHER
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD, CHRISTOPHER S. RANDOLPH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RANDOLPH v. USA
as 1:2016cv01225
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
RONALD RANDOLPH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
DANSON v. USA
as 1:2016cv01141
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
RANDOLPH DANSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Daud Holiday v. USA, et al
as 15-5193
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Daud Abdullah Holiday
Defendant - Appellee:
United States of America, District of Columbia, United States and others
Randolph Greene v. DC, et al
as 08-7143
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Randolph J. Greene
Defendant - Appellee:
District of Columbia, William L. Pollard, President, University of the District of Columbia, Clemmie Solomon, Vice President, University of The District of Columbia and others
THOMAS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2008cv00628
Plaintiff:
RANDOLPH THOMAS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, SUPREME COURT and CONGRESS
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
