Cases 161 - 170 of 3,660
Cox v. Lancaster County et al
as 8:2023cv00287
Plaintiff:
Travis Cox
Defendant:
Lancaster County, Lancaster County Drug Court, Touchstone Treatment Facility and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cox v. Douglas County et al
as 8:2023cv00297
Plaintiff:
Travis Cox
Defendant:
Douglas County, Douglas County Department of Corrections and Well Path Medical Providers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilson v. Post et al
as 8:2023cv00326
Petitioner:
Jesse Wilson
Respondent:
Ryan S. Post and Mike Hilgers
Interested Party:
Nebraska Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Clark v. Jeffreys
as 4:2023cv03118
Petitioner:
Paul A. Clark
Respondent:
Rob Jeffreys
Interested Party:
State of Nebraska
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. USA
as 4:2023cv03151
Petitioner:
Walter B. Jones, Jr.
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Franco v. USA
as 8:2023cv00362
Petitioner:
Chad M. Franco
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Robinson v. State of Nebraska
as 8:2023cv00276
Plaintiff:
Kirk Robinson
Defendant:
State of Nebraska
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ellis v Jeffreys
as 8:2023cv00315
Petitioner:
Roy L. Ellis
Respondent:
Rob Jeffreys
Interested Party:
Nebraska Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Tuttle v. USA
as 8:2023cv00321
Petitioner:
Lacee Tuttle
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Robinson v. Dakota County Corrections
as 8:2023cv00333
Plaintiff:
Darwin Jay Robinson, Jr.
Defendant:
Dakota County Corrections
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.
