Cases 11 - 20 of 72
Morel v. Pearce et al
as 7:2023cv00090
Plaintiff:
Lenin Morel
Defendant:
Kevin Pearce, James Adams, Nathan Tussey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davila v. USP Big Sandy
as 7:2023cv00061
Petitioner:
Christopher James Davila
Respondent:
USP Big Sandy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
McLaughlin v. USP Big Sandy et al
as 7:2023cv00052
Plaintiff:
Brooke Aaron McLaughlin
Defendant:
USP Big Sandy, Federal Bureau of Prisons and Agent Parr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Brown v. USP Big Sandy Penitentiary
as 7:2023cv00027
Plaintiff:
Terrance Brown
Defendant:
USP Big Sandy Penitentiary
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Keith Drummond v. Gregory Kizziah
as 23-5212
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KEITH DRUMMOND
Defendant / Appellee:
GREGORY A. KIZZIAH, Warden, USP McCreary
Stanley v. USP Big Sandy
as 3:2023cv00012
Plaintiff:
Steven Stanley
Defendant:
USP Big Sandy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Keith Drummond v. Gregory Kizziah
as 23-5088
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KEITH DRUMMOND
Defendant / Appellee:
GREGORY A. KIZZIAH, Warden, USP McCreary
Robinson et al v. Warden of USP McCreary et al
as 6:2022cv00226
Plaintiff:
Chauncey Robinson and Kevin B. Keys
Defendant:
Warden of USP McCreary, Federal Contractors, State Contractors and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Dominique Johnson v. USA, et al
as 22-5863
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DOMINIQUE JOHNSON
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CHRISTOPHER GOMEZ, Former Warden USP McCreary, JOHN DOE, being sued as Captain (during 2020), USP McCreary and others
Marrero v. Warden, USP McCreary et al
as 6:2022cv00125
Plaintiff:
Edwin Marrero
Defendant:
Warden, USP McCreary and John and Jane Doe(s)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
