Cases 1 - 10 of 164
Jonathan Brunson v. John Herring
as 24-6059
Petitioner:
JONATHAN EUGENE BRUNSON
Defendant:
JOHN HERRING, Superintendent, Maury Correctional Institution
Arnold McCartney v. Donnie Ames
as 23-7197
Petitioner / Appellant:
ARNOLD WAYNE MCCARTNEY
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent, Mount Olive Correctional Complex and Jail
John Butler v. Superintendent Stanley
as 23-7161
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOHN EDWARD BUTLER
Respondent / Appellee:
ACTING SUPERINTENDENT STANLEY
Raymond Richardson v. Donnie Ames
as 23-7147
Petitioner / Appellant:
RAYMOND ANDREW RICHARDSON
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent
Don Galloway v. Donnie Ames
as 23-7046
Petitioner / Appellant:
DON GARFIELD GALLOWAY
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent, Mount Olive Correctional Complex and R. S. MUTTER, Superintendent
Brian Farabee v. Sheriff of Dinwiddie County
as 23-7037
Petitioner / Appellant:
BRIAN DAMON FARABEE
Respondent:
SHERIFF OF DINWIDDIE COUNTY, (successor or designee), CHADWICK DOTSON, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, DEPARTMENT OF VIRGINIA STATE POLICE and others
Respondent / Appellee:
NELSON SMITH, Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Development Services (DBHDS)
Nicholas Robey v. Donald Ames
as 23-6790
Petitioner / Appellant:
NICHOLAS ROBEY
Respondent / Appellee:
DONALD F. AMES, Superintendent, Mount Olive Correctional Complex
John Smith v. Donnie Ames
as 23-6786
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOHN D. SMITH
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent
Brandon Saul v. Donnie Ames
as 23-6769
Petitioner / Appellant:
BRANDON S. SAUL
Respondent / Appellee:
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent, Mt. Olive Complex
Barney Dunlap v. David Mitchell
as 23-6700
Petitioner / Appellant:
BARNEY ADRIAN DUNLAP
Respondent / Appellee:
DAVID MITCHELL, Superintendent, Lanesboro Correctional Institution
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.
