Cases 51 - 60 of 112
Michael Burns v. USA
as 13-5018
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL R. BURNS
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons; Juan D. Castillo, Warden; Dr. Nahem Naimey; Harrell Watts; Mr. Franklund; and P.A. Cabanero
Richie Conner v. USA, et al
as 12-4461
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RITCHIE HANSFORD CONNER
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, WARDEN, FCI ELKTON and others
Lamarr Fletcher v. Attorney General of the United, et al
as 12-6390
Petitioner - Appellant:
LAMARR FLETCHER
Respondent - Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Fred Erby v. Sheriff Oldham, et al
as 12-6235
Petitioner - Appellant:
FRED ERBY
Respondent - Appellee:
SHERIFF OLDHAM, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and MEDICAL CENTER FEDERAL PRISONERS, at Springfield, Missouri
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 12-4208
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Rigoberto Arzate-Miranda v. Federal Bureau of Prison
as 12-5727
Petitioner - Appellant:
RIGOBERTO ARZATE-MIRANDA
Respondent - Appellee:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Robert Wardrick v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al
as 12-5231
Petitioner - Appellant:
ROBERT WARDRICK
Respondent - Appellee:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
Timothy Young v. Federal Bureau of Prison
as 12-1226
Petitioner - Appellant:
TIMOTHY YOUNG
Respondent - Appellee:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
John Futch v. Federal Bureau of Prison
as 12-5010
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOHN RANDALL FUTCH
Respondent - Appellee:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Robert Smallwood v. USA, et al
as 11-6399
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT JESSE SMALLWOOD
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and FIVE UNKNOWN FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISON EMPLOYEES
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.
