Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Hill *DO NOT FILE* v. Loden
![Final or Interim Order We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case](/bundles/docketsbrowsing/images/gavel.png)
as 3:2023cv00293
Petitioner:
Russell K. Hill DO NOT FILE and Russell Keith Hill
Defendant:
Warden C. Loden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Hill v. Fox et al
![Final or Interim Order We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case](/bundles/docketsbrowsing/images/gavel.png)
as 1:2013cv00231
Petitioner:
Brandon Keith Hill
Respondent:
John B Fox and US Justice Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
![Final or Interim Order We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case](/bundles/docketsbrowsing/images/gavel.png)
as 2:2013cv00049
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 00 U.S.C. § 0000 Cause Code Unknown
Russell Hill v. City of Purvis, Mississippi, et al
as 09-60143
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RUSSELL KEITH HILL
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF PURVIS, MISSISSIPPI, JIMMY BOONE, THOMAS SCHWARTZ and others
Russell Hill v. Robert Mingo, et al
as 09-60136
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RUSSELL KEITH HILL
Defendant - Appellee:
ROBERT MINGO, Warden at Marion/Walthall Correctional Facility and MARVIN E BREAZEALE, Sheriff, Lamar County
Russell Hill v. Marvin Breazeale, et al
as 09-60122
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RUSSELL KEITH HILL
Defendant - Appellee:
MARVIN E BREAZEALE, CATHY TATUM and LAMAR COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
Hill v. Sephton
as 08-60954
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RUSSELL KEITH HILL
Defendant - Appellee:
BETTY W SEPHTON, of Mississippi Supreme Court, individual and official capacity
Hill v. Banks
as 2:2007cv00139
Plaintiff:
Russell Keith Hill
Defendant:
Jackelyn Banks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.