Cases 31 - 40 of 49
Arop v. US Marshall
as 4:2016cv03131
Petitioner:
Ajang Arop
Respondent:
US Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Lim v. US Marshals, et al
as 8:2016cv00254
Defendant:
John Doe #1, John Doe #2, Eban Jones and others
Plaintiff:
John Dewey Lim
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lyons v. Sanders et al
as 6:2016cv03074
Plaintiff:
Deon Lorenzo Lyons
Defendant:
Linda Sanders, J Grondolsky, FMC Devens Administration and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Hayes v. Drew, et al
as 5:2015cv04089
Plaintiff:
Brandon Lee Hayes
Defendant:
David Drew, Phillips, US Marshals Office and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hunter v. Herrington et al
as 6:2014cv03366
Petitioner:
Michael Hunter
Respondent:
Ron Herrington, US Marshals Service and Linda Sanders
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Stine v. US Marshal Justice Prisoner Air Transport Division et al
as 6:2014cv03351
Plaintiff:
Mikeal Glenn Stine
Defendant:
US Marshal Justice Prisoner Air Transport Division, John Doe #1, John Doe #2 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Trevino v. Woodberry County Jail et al
as 5:2014cv04051
Plaintiff:
Richard Trevino
Defendant:
Woodberry County Jail, Lieutenant Phillips, Carlos Lnu and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Woolridge v. US Marshals Service et al
as 4:2014cv00243
Plaintiff:
Joshua Todd Woolridge
Defendant:
US Marshals Service and Bryan H. Cutter
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Gilmore v. Keeler et al
as 4:2013cv01148
Plaintiff:
Charles M. Gilmore
Defendant:
Scott Keeler, Sammy Bowden and US Marshals Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Post v. US Marshals Service et al
as 4:2013cv00958
Plaintiff:
Mark Post
Defendant:
US Marshals Service and Michael Valentine
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
