Cases 81 - 90 of 467
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv02153
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HILL v. KIRBY et al
as 1:2014cv02174
Petitioner:
DERRICK HILL
Respondent:
MARK KIRBY and ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv02123
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
TURNER v. HOLDER
as 1:2014cv02009
Plaintiff:
DONALD TURNER
Defendant:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
MISHRA et al v. JOHNSON et al
as 1:2014cv02013
Defendant:
JEH JOHNSON, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., JAMES B. COMEY and others
Plaintiff:
NIHARIKA MISHRA , BISWAMOHAN MISHRA and R. M.
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
SHARMA et al v. JOHNSON et al
as 1:2014cv02008
Plaintiff:
DHARMPAL SHARMA and SHIKHA SHARMA
Defendant:
JEH JOHNSON, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., JAMES B. COMEY and others
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
HENDERSON v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
as 1:2014cv02002
Plaintiff:
JAMES M. HENDERSON
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE and ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
ORTIZ-CONTRERAS v. HOLDER et al
as 1:2014cv01950
Plaintiff:
LUCIO ORTIZ-CONTRERAS
Defendant:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., HARLEY G. LAPPIN, CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Vivek Shah v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 14-5280
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Vivek Shah
Defendant - Appellee:
Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General for the United States
STEPHENSON et al v. HOLDER et al
as 1:2014cv01917
Plaintiff:
DAVID CARROLL STEPHENSON and LONNIE GENE VERNON
Defendant:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR. and CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR.
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
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.
