Cases 41 - 50 of 388
Mozuch et al. v. Norfolk Southern Corporation et al.
as 4:2023cv00415
Plaintiff:
rosemary mozuch, charles mozuch, james saling and others
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Corporation and Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Property Damage
Holcomb v. Bowers et al
as 2:2023cv02074
Petitioner:
George Noah Holcomb, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden Bowers and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Greer v. Banks et al
as 2:2023cv02059
Plaintiff:
Ricco Greer
Defendant:
C. Banks, Department of Justice Director, H. Zabitoskey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Childers v. Bowers
as 2:2023cv02056
Petitioner:
Gary J. Childers
Respondent:
Warden Bowers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Pelletier v. Bowers
as 2:2023cv02044
Petitioner:
Robert J Pelletier
Respondent:
Warden-FCI Bowers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Tatar v. Griffin et al
as 2:2023cv02023
Defendant:
CMC Johnson, STA Zebtaski, Edu Officer (F/N/U) Griffin and others
Plaintiff:
Serdar Tatar
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Anderson v. Bowers
as 2:2023cv02013
Petitioner:
Elvis Anderson
Respondent:
Warden Bowers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Baker v. Bowers
as 2:2023cv02007
Petitioner:
Daniel A. Baker
Respondent:
Warden Bowers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Ware-Mustapha v. Dixon et al
as 2:2022cv02874
Plaintiff:
Eric Ware-Mustapha and Eric Ware
Defendant:
Officer Dixon, Officer Claxton, Dr. Gill and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
USA v. James Bowers
as 22-6095
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
JAMES ALLEN BOWERS
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.
