Cases 41 - 50 of 290
Rossahn Black v. USA
as 23-1242
Petitioner / Appellant:
ROSSAHN BLACK
Respondent / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Pipkin v. State of Tenn. et al
as 2:2023cv02140
Plaintiff:
Byron Pipkin
Defendant:
State of Tenn., Shelby County Sheriff Department, Sgt. Mathew and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Squires v. Black
as 1:2022cv02271
Petitioner:
Jeff Squires and Jeffrey A. Squires
Respondent:
Warden Kenneth Black
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gutierrez v. Black
as 5:2022cv02264
Petitioner:
Victor Gutierrez
Respondent:
Warden Kenneth Black
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bobby Gilbert v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, et al
as 22-4035
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BOBBY DEAN GILBERT
Defendant / Appellee:
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION RECLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE, K. BLACK, Warden, Richland Correctional Institution and others
Gulley v. Black
as 5:2022cv02217
Petitioner:
Jesse Gulley
Respondent:
Warden Jennifer Gillece Black
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Virostek v. Black
as 1:2022cv02166
Petitioner:
Michael J Virostek and Michael J. Virostek
Respondent:
Warden Kenneth Black
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Black
as 1:2022cv02155
Petitioner:
Shawn-Lamar Jones
Respondent:
Warden Kenneth Black
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Harris v. Black
as 1:2022cv02116
Petitioner:
Walter Harris
Respondent:
Warden Kenneth Black
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bruce Arnoff v. Kenneth Black
as 22-3815
Petitioner / Appellant:
BRUCE ARNOFF
Respondent / Appellee:
KENNETH BLACK, Warden
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.
