Cases 11 - 20 of 25
KALU v. WIGEN et al
as 3:2013cv00274
Plaintiff:
KALU KALU
Defendant:
GEORGE WIGEN, P. JUSTER, SCOTT BLAKE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BANKS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2013cv01615
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK BANKS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, BEN LNU and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GRANT v. BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 3:2013cv00210
Petitioner:
ANDRE E. GRANT
Respondent:
BUREAU OF PRISONS, G. C. WIGENS, ERIC HOLDER, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
BANKS v UNKNOWN
as 2:2013cv01198
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK BANKS
Defendant:
AN UNKNOWN NAMED NUMBER OF US POSTAL INSPECTORS, UNITED SAFETY SERVICE, DAVID ANDERCHAK and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv01063
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
BANKS v. REALTY COUNSELING COMPANY, et al.
as 2:2013cv01025
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK BANKS
Defendant:
REALTY COUNSELING COMPANY, JIM SPROUT, CASE MANAGER ANESBURG and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
MARIMUTHU v. WIGEN et al
as 3:2013cv00037
Plaintiff:
JAISANKAR MARIMUTHU
Defendant:
C. G. WIGEN, U.S. ATTORNEY, PENNSYLVANIA, AMIE S. MURPHY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
BANKS v. PUGH et al
as 2:2013cv00119
Petitioner:
FREDERICK BANKS
Respondent:
M. PUGH, CCA (CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA), NORTHEAST OHIO CORRECTIONAL CENTER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
VERDE-RODRIGUEZ v. FABER et al
as 2:2011cv01475
Petitioner:
JOSE PEDRO VERDE-RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
ROBERT G. FABER and ERIC HOLDER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00244
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 791
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.
