Cases 1 - 10 of 49
HOUCK et al v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2024cv02151
Plaintiff:
MARK HOUCK and RYAN-MARIE HOUCK
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MICHAEL ROGERS, JUAN BARRIOS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action
Lawrence v. Zendesk, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv01089
Plaintiff:
Richard Lawrence
Defendant:
Zendesk, Inc., Mikkel Svane, Archana Agrawal and others
WATKINS et al v. LANIGAN et al
as 3:2019cv00059
Defendant:
STEVE JOHNSON, GARY M. LANIGAN and JOHN DOE #1
Plaintiff:
CLINT WALKER and JESSE WATKINS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCCRIMMON v. JOHNSON et al
as 3:2018cv16281
Defendant:
STEVE JOHNSON, JOHN DOE, R. WEST and others
Plaintiff:
RASOOL MCCRIMMON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
AVILA v. JOHNSON et al
as 1:2018cv09422
Petitioner:
ABDIEL F. AVILA
Respondent:
STEVE JOHNSON and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
LEMONS v. LANIGAN et al
as 3:2017cv04224
Plaintiff:
IAN LEMONS
Defendant:
GARY LANIGAN, JOHN OR JANE DOE, ROBERT BARTKOWSKI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GLENN v. JOHNSON et al
as 3:2017cv03802
Plaintiff:
CHARLES GLENN
Defendant:
STEVE JOHNSON, GARY LANIGAN, ROBERT ROYCE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RAMOS v. NEW JERSEY STATE PRISON et al
as 1:2016cv09139
Petitioner:
LUIS RAMOS
Respondent:
NEW JERSEY STATE PRISON, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY and STEVE JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SIMMONS v. JOHNSON et al
as 3:2016cv08916
Plaintiff:
ANTOINE LAVELLE SIMMONS
Defendant:
STEVE JOHNSON, FRANCIS DANELY, BRIAN PERKINS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SIMMONS v. LANIGAN et al
as 3:2016cv04215
Plaintiff:
ANTOINE LAVELLE SIMMONS
Defendant:
GARY LANIGAN, STEVE JOHNSON, TINA CORTES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
