Cases 11 - 20 of 36
Charles Miller, II v. USA
as 19-1090
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Petitioner:
CHARLES E. MILLER, II
YOUNG v. CARTER et al
as 1:2018cv02079
Defendant:
ROBERT CARTER, JR., FREDERICK A. MEDLEY, ROBERT SMITH and others
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK A. YOUNG
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gary Jackson, Sr., et al v. Bruce Lemmon, et al
as 18-1585
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GARY ALLEN JACKSON, SR.
Appellant:
LORIE A. JACKSON
Defendant - Appellee:
BRUCE LEMMON, individually and in his capacity as Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Correction, THOR R. MILLER, individually and in his capactiy as Chairman of the Indiana Parole Board, RANDALL P. GENTRY, individually and in his capacity as a member of the Indiana Parole Board and others
HOLLEMAN v. HORTH
as 2:2017cv00512
Defendant:
JANE DOE #1, GWENDOLYN M. HORTH, VIRGIL R. MADDEN and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT L. HOLLEMAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Charles Miller, II v. USA
as 17-2911
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHARLES E. MILLER, II
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Charles Miller, II v. USA
as 17-1753
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHARLES E. MILLER, II
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Charles Miller, II v. USA
as 17-1542
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHARLES E. MILLER, II
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
COX v. STATE OF INDIANA et al
as 1:2017cv00226
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM COX
Defendant:
GWEN HORTH, STANLEY KNIGHT, VIRGIL R. MADDEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MANLEY v. MILLER
as 1:2016cv03307
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. MANLEY
Defendant:
CHARLES P. MILLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JACKSON et al v. LEMMON et al
as 1:2016cv02551
Defendant:
DREW ADAMS, TRACY BERRY, RANDALL P. GENTRY and others
Plaintiff:
GARY A. JACKSON, SR. and LORIE A. JACKSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
