Cases 1 - 10 of 4,676
Clem v. Rausch
as 3:2024cv00733
Plaintiff:
Charles Ray Clem
Defendant:
David Rausch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bixler v. Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2024cv00351
Plaintiff:
Kagan Cole Bixler
Defendant:
Department of Corrections and David Green
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. COCROFT et al
as 2:2024cv03215
Petitioner:
DEONDRE E. SMITH
Respondent:
Judge Kimberly Cocroft, JEFF ZEZECH, GEORGE WHARTON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
ROBISON v. WENGER et al
as 2:2024cv03219
Petitioner:
BRADLEY C. ROBISON
Respondent:
BEAU D. WENGER, David C Young, COLIN E. PETERS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
ROBISON v. WENGER et al
as 2:2024cv03217
Plaintiff:
BRADLEY C. ROBISON
Defendant:
BEAU D. WENGER, Scott A Smith, David C Young and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hamilton v. Tennessee Department of Correction et al
as 3:2024cv00725
Plaintiff:
David Hamilton
Defendant:
Tennessee Department of Correction, Grady Perry, James Franks and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. COCROFT et al
as 2:2024cv03208
Plaintiff:
DEONDRE EUGENE SMITH
Defendant:
Judge Kimberly Cocroft, JEFF ZEZECH, David F. Zeyen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
David MacLloyd v. USA
as 24-1505
Petitioner:
DAVID ERIKE MACLLOYD
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Stickney v. Warden David Paul of Federal Medical Center Lexington
as 5:2024cv00148
Petitioner:
Brian Thomas Stickney
Respondent:
Warden David Paul of Federal Medical Center Lexington
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Jacobs v. David et al
as 5:2024cv11463
Plaintiff:
William Edwin Jacobs
Defendant:
David, Frangedakis, Branch 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.
