Cases 11 - 20 of 162
Feaster v. Chambers-Smith et al
as 1:2022cv00313
Plaintiff:
Terrance J Feaster
Defendant:
Annette Chambers-Smith, Ronald T. Erdos, Cynthia Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dye v. Erdos
as 1:2022cv00848
Petitioner:
Jamal Dye
Respondent:
Warden Ronald Erdos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FLING ERROR
as 1:2022cv00845
Petitioner:
Jamal Dye
Respondent:
Warden Ronald Erdos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brown v. Mahlman et al
as 1:2022cv00239
Plaintiff:
Michael DeAndre Brown
Defendant:
Linnea Mahlman, James Whitman, Roger Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jermeal White v. Ronald Erdos, et al
as 22-3350
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JERMEAL WHITE
Defendant / Appellee:
RONALD ERDOS, Warden, CYNTHIA DAVIS, Unit Manager Chief, JUSTIN DEERFIELD and others
Interested Party:
STATE OF OHIO
Glenn v. Basham et al
as 2:2022cv01904
Plaintiff:
Michael H. Glenn
Defendant:
C/o Basham, C/o McCoy and Warden Erdos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Glenn v. Basham et al
as 1:2022cv00202
Plaintiff:
Michael H. Glenn
Defendant:
C/o Basham, C/o McCoy and Warden Erdos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Perry v. Erdos et al
as 1:2022cv00178
Plaintiff:
Anthony R. Perry
Defendant:
Ronald Erdos, Lieutenant Fry, Officer Robert Dofflemyer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kendrick v. Chamber-Smith et al
as 1:2022cv00170
Plaintiff:
Mark Kendrick
Defendant:
Annette Chamber-Smith, Ronald T. Erdos, Linnea Mahlman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hairston v. Sparks et al
as 1:2022cv00104
Plaintiff:
Rico Isaih Hairston
Defendant:
Sparks, Theodore Jackson, Crawford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
