Cases 1 - 10 of 19
MCKELLOP v. DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 1:2024cv00828
Petitioner:
JEFFREY A. MCKELLOP
Respondent:
DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
HUNTER v. CTF
as 1:2022cv03865
Plaintiff:
STEVEN HUNTER
Defendant:
CTF, DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and HEALTH SERVICES CTF
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GATLING v. DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 1:2013cv01487
Plaintiff:
LEWIS EARNEST GATLING
Defendant:
DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv01933
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
OWENS v. DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2012cv00989
Plaintiff:
ALPHONSO DEWAYNE OWENS
Defendant:
DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WARDEN, ARMSTRONG and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GAYMON v. BROWN et al
as 1:2010cv01879
Plaintiff:
EDDIE GAYMON, Jr.
Defendant:
DEVON BROWN, WAINWRIGHT, DARRYL ELLISON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LONG v. DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2009cv01072
Plaintiff:
LOWELL B. LONG
Defendant:
DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and BISHOP
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BLANCHARD v. THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 1:2009cv00981
Plaintiff:
RAY BLANCHARD, III
Defendant:
THE DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CEASAR v.OBEBE, et al.
as 1:2009cv00609
Plaintiff:
MAURICE CEASAR
Defendant:
DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS NORTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE, R. A. KRANZEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRIS v. DC CITY ADMINISTRATOR et al
as 1:2009cv00430
Plaintiff:
THOMAS EDWARD HARRIS
Defendant:
DC CITY ADMINISTRATOR, DIRECTOR OF DC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, SIMON WAINWRIGHT and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
