Cases 31 - 40 of 461
Ashley Heath Baker v. Larry Chandler, et al
as 23-5015
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ASHLEY HEATH A. BAKER
Defendant / Appellee:
LARRY D. CHANDLER, Warden, COOKIE CREWS, RHONDA D. MAY and others
Dickens v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2022cv13053
Plaintiff:
Everege Vernor Dickens
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Chandler Cheeks, Hohn and others
Baker v. Chandler et al
as 0:2022cv00110
Plaintiff:
Ashley Heath A Baker, Anthony Baker, Ashley Heath Baker and others
Defendant:
Larry D. Chandler, Cookie Crews, Rhonda May and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Perthou v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv04086
Plaintiff:
Alison Chandler Perthou
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. v. Kentucky Public Service Commission
as 3:2022cv00063
Plaintiff:
East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc.
Defendant:
Kentucky Public Service Commission, Kent A. Chandler and Mary Pat Regan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Leslein v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 2:2022cv03884
Plaintiff:
Chandler Leslein
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Chandler v. United States of America
as 2:2022cv02745
Petitioner:
Arthur Lee Chandler
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
USA v. Arthur Chandler
as 22-5956
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
ARTHUR LEE CHANDLER
Michael ChandlerIn re: Michael Chandler
as 22-3874
Petitioner:
In re: MICHAEL MURRAY CHANDLER
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Workman v. Chandler et al
as 0:2022cv00079
Plaintiff:
Albert Easley Workman, Jr.
Defendant:
Larry Chandler, Patrick Snyder, Trent Fannin 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.
