Cases 41 - 50 of 99
Boyles v. USA
as 2:2016cv00071
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Arica M. Boyles
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Davis v. Britt et al
as 5:2016ct03211
Plaintiff:
William Scott Davis, Jr.
Defendant:
W. Earl Britt, James C. Fox, James C. Dever, III and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Oliver Kareem Phillips v. Terrence W. Boyle
as 16-6121
Plaintiff - Appellant:
OLIVER KAREEM PHILLIPS
Defendant - Appellee:
TERRENCE W. BOYLE, Judge
Phillips v. Boyle
as 5:2015ct03327
Plaintiff:
Oliver Kareem Phillips
Defendant:
Terrence W. Boyle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Joseph Midyette v. US
as 15-7927
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOSEPH DIXON MIDYETTE
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TERRENCE W. BOYLE, Judge and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES
Hazel v. Lappin et al
as 2:2015cv00090
Plaintiff:
Bobby E. Hazel
Defendant:
Harley G. Lappin, Joe Driver, Jeff Boyles and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Nobles v. United States of America et al
as 5:2015ct03217
Plaintiff:
Cornelius A. Nobles
Defendant:
United States of America and Terrence W. Boyle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dennis Van Dyke v. Scott Slusser
as 15-6938
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SAINT DENNIS ROGER VAN DYKE, Pro Se Writer Attorney At Law Prophet Pastor Rabbi
Defendant - Appellee:
SCOTT SLUSSER, SEAN F. PERRIN, Attorney - Womble Carlyle Sandridge and Rice, ADRIAN W. DELLINGER and others
Midyette v. United States of America, et al
as 5:2015hc02108
Petitioner:
Joseph D. Midyette
Respondent:
United States of America, Terrence W. Boyle and Attorney General of the United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
VAN DYKE PRO SE WRITER ATTORNEY AT LAW PROPHET PASTOR RABBI v. SLUSSER et al
as 1:2014cv00712
Plaintiff:
SAINT DENNIS ROGER VAN DYKE PRO SE WRITER ATTORNEY AT LAW PROPHET PASTOR RABBI
Defendant:
SCOTT T. SLUSSER, SEAN PERRIN, ADRIAN W. DELLINGER 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.
