Cases 81 - 90 of 211
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00032
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
John D. Simpson v. Terry McAuliffe
as 17-6637
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN DAVID SIMPSON
Defendant - Appellee:
TERRY MCAULIFFE, Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, KAREN D. BROWN, Chairman of the Commonwealth of Va. Division of Parole (VPB), HAROLD W. CLARKE, Executive Director, Virginia Department of Correction (VADOC) and others
Thomas Ebron v. Karen D. Brown
as 17-6622
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS EBRON
Defendant - Appellee:
KAREN D. BROWN, Chair, VA. Parole Board and VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD, Members
Frazier et al v. McLean et al
as 1:2017cv00888
Plaintiff:
Robert E. Frazier , David M. Williamson , Keith M. Yacko and others
Defendant:
Clint A. McLean and Chevera D. Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1444
Leon Cheatham v. William Muse
as 17-6415
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LEON CHEATHAM
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM MUSE, Chairman, HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, WENDY K. BROWN, Legal Services Community Release Manager for VDOC and others
Dougherty v Commonwealth of Virginia, et al.
as 1:2017cv00302
Plaintiff:
Robert W. Dougherty
Defendant:
Dana Lawhorne, Schuler, Sergeant Hall and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 17-1235
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Ebron v. Brown et al
as 3:2017cv00143
Petitioner:
Thomas Ebron
Respondent:
Karen D. Brown and Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
MOBLEY v. ESTES et al
as 1:2017cv00114
Plaintiff:
JASON DARNELL MOBLEY
Defendant:
B. D. ESTES, T. D. BROWN and GREENSBORO CITY POLICE DEPT.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brown v. Brown et al
as 1:2017cv00052
Petitioner:
Demmerick Eric Brown
Respondent:
Karen D. Brown and Harold Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
