Cases 21 - 30 of 321
James Jenkins, III v. Ron Neal
as 23-1975
Petitioner / Appellant:
JAMES B. JENKINS, III
Respondent / Appellee:
RON NEAL, Warden
Johnson v. Misner et al
as 2:2023cv00557
Plaintiff:
Timothy James Johnson
Defendant:
Michael Misner, Officer Phillip Briski, Officer Jenkins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jenkins, Donta v. Riewestahl, Dave et al
as 3:2023cv00271
Plaintiff:
Donta Jenkins
Defendant:
Sheriff Dave Riewestahl, Cpt. Holbrook, Sgt. Fields and others
Not Classified By Court:
DCI Prison Facility and GBCI Prison Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jenkins v. Warden
as 3:2023cv00293
Petitioner:
James Jenkins, III and James Jenkins
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Holloway v. Redman et al
as 3:2023cv00278
Plaintiff:
Rayshawn Anthony Holloway and Rayshawn Holloway
Defendant:
Redman, Sheperd, Fields and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jenkins v. Warden
as 3:2023cv00247
Petitioner:
James Jenkins, III
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cecil Jenkins v. Richard Brown, et al
as 23-1540
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CECIL JENKINS
Defendant / Appellee:
RICHARD BROWN, JERRY SNYDER, CHARLES DUGAN and others
Antwon Jenkins v. USA
as 23-1407
Petitioner / Appellant:
ANTWON D. JENKINS
Respondent / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Jenkins v. Jeffrey et al
as 3:2023cv00270
Petitioner:
William J. Jenkins
Respondent:
Rob Jeffrey, IL Dept. of Corrections, #1 Warden B.M.R.C.C. and others
Defendant:
BMRCC Property Staff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pritchett v. Gomez et al
as 3:2023cv03011
Plaintiff:
Sabrina Pritchett
Defendant:
. Gomez, Internal Affairs, . Jenkin 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.
