Cases 31 - 40 of 54
BOWLING v. KNIGHT
as 1:2016cv01913
Petitioner:
STEVEN B. BOWLING
Respondent:
STANLEY KNIGHT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bowles v. Dorethy et al
as 4:2016cv04121
Plaintiff:
Alvin Bowles
Defendant:
Stephanie Dorethy, Jamar A Range, . Millard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BOWLING v. PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 1:2016cv01147
Petitioner:
STEVEN B. BOWLING
Respondent:
PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BOWLING v. INDIANA STATE PRISON
as 1:2016cv00853
Petitioner:
STEVEN B. BOWLING
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT, PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bowling v. United States of America
as 2:2016cv00474
Petitioner:
Terry Bowling
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
BOWLING v. PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 1:2016cv00855
Petitioner:
STEVEN B. BOWLING
Respondent:
PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Malone v. Illinois Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2016cv00277
Plaintiff:
William A Malone
Defendant:
Illinois Department of Corrections, Jacqueline Lashbrook, Thomas A Spiller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bowling v. Lewis et al
as 1:2016cv02136
Plaintiff:
John Milton Bowling, Jr.
Defendant:
Brian Lewis, Steve Hopkins, Robert Niles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BOWLING v. SUPERINTENDANT
as 1:2016cv00066
Petitioner:
STEVEN B. BOWLING
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDANT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
O'Quinn v. Olkoski et al
as 3:2015cv00796
Plaintiff:
Chester O'Quinn
Defendant:
Jason Olkoski, Thomas Spiller, S A Godinez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
