Cases 1 - 10 of 27
Kenneth Mobley v. DOJ, et al
as 24-5477
Plaintiff:
KENNETH MOBLEY
Defendant:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF PRISONS, WARDEN F. J. BOWERS, FCI Memphis and others
Anthony Stokes v. Merrick Garland, et al
as 24-5034
Petitioner:
ANTHONY DARNELL STOKES
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General, GARY SWANEY, Warden, FCI Manchester and U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-6123
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Dijon Dixon v. Eric Erwin, et al
as 23-5377
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DIJON T. DIXON
Defendant / Appellee:
ERIC A. ERWIN, Assistant Warden, UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY AT BIG SANDY, HECTOR JOYNER, Warden and others
Lenin Morel v. Kevin Pearce, et al
as 22-5913
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LENIN MOREL
Defendant / Appellee:
LIEUTENANT KEVIN PEARCE, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER JAMES ADAMS, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER NATHAN TUSSEY and others
Lenin Morel v. Kevin Pearce, et al
as 22-5878
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LENIN MOREL
Defendant / Appellee:
LIEUTENANT KEVIN PEARCE, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER JAMES ADAMS, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER NATHAN TUSSEY and others
Mark Jordan v. DOJ, et al
as 17-5467
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK JORDAN
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Federal Bureau of Prisons, officially, C. MCKENZIE, Correctional Officer and M. PARR, Executive Assistant/ISM, Individually
Jack Mann v. Gregory Schlottman, et al
as 17-1136
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JACK MANN
Defendant - Appellee:
GREGORY SCHLOTTMAN, MOLLY BITTENBENDER, J. A. TERRIS, Warden and others
Jeffrey LeBlanc v. DOJ
as 16-1057
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JEFFREY R. LEBLANC
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Rights Division
Julian Rochester v. William Nettles, et al
as 15-5474
Petitioner - Appellant:
JULIAN E. ROCHESTER
Respondent - Appellee:
WILLIAM N. NETTLES, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, ALAN WILSON and others
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.
