Cases 51 - 60 of 134,724
Dixon v. Wallens Ridge State Prison et al
as 7:2024cv00364
Plaintiff:
Hunter Dixon
Defendant:
Wallens Ridge State Prison, J. Artrip, Major Hall and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Holloman v. Unknown
as 7:2024cv00366
Plaintiff:
Shavis Holloman
Defendant:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cooper v. Mullins et al
as 7:2024cv00365
Plaintiff:
Thad Gilbert Cooper
Defendant:
Dr Mullins, CO Johnson, C/O Kennedy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lott v. Ray
as 5:2024cv00104
Petitioner:
Darion D Lott
Respondent:
Warden Ray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Fields v. Warden
as 2:2024cv00275
Plaintiff:
Jay James Fields
Defendant:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Michael Grace v. Alamance County
as 24-6538
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JERMAINE GRACE
Defendant:
ALAMANCE COUNTY, GRAHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICER CROSS and others
Karsten Allen v. T. Norvell
as 24-6541
Plaintiff:
KARSTEN OBED ALLEN
Defendant:
T. NORVELL, Sergeant, Housing Unit B at Keen Mountain Correctional Center, R. MULLINS, Correctional Officer, Housing Unit B at Keen Mountain Correctional Center, G. V. HORNE, Lieutenant at Keen Mountain Correctional Center and others
Jonathan Newell v. Erik Hooks
as 24-6543
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN JAMES NEWELL and TIMOTHY FRANKLIN BALLARD, III
Defendant:
ERIK A. HOOKS, in his individual capacity and EDDIE M. BUFFALOE, JR., in his official capacity
Watson v. Warden et al
as 2:2024cv03364
Plaintiff:
Marvin M. Watson
Defendant:
Warden, Travis Guess and S. Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Sherrod v. USA 2255
as 8:2024cv01653
Petitioner:
Deon Enrique Sherrod
Respondent:
USA 2255
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
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.
