Cases 1 - 10 of 31
Albert Millsapp v. MO DOC Employees, et al
as 23-2982
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Albert Millsapp
Defendant / Appellee:
Missouri Department of Corrections Employees, Lindsey Hill, Brittany Odom, Corrections Officer and others
Tripp v. Damguard et al
as 4:2023cv04105
Petitioner:
Kevin Christopher Micheal Tripp
Respondent:
Judge Natalie Damguard, Judge Robbin J. Howman, Thomas Hensley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hensley v. Department of Justice
as 4:2022cv00879
Plaintiff:
Robert Nathan Hensley
Defendant:
Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Robert Hensley v. United States
as 22-1092
Petitioner / Appellant:
Robert Nathan Hensley
Respondent / Appellee:
United States of America
Hensley v. USA
as 4:2021cv01160
Petitioner:
Robert Nathan Hensley
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Millsapp v. Missouri Department of Corrections Staff et al
as 2:2021cv04213
Plaintiff:
Albert Millsapp
Defendant:
Missouri Department of Corrections Staff, Officer Hill, Odom and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Compton v. Iowa Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2021cv00329
Plaintiff:
Marcel S. Compton
Defendant:
Iowa Department of Corrections, Beth Skinner, Shawn Howard and others
Interested Party:
William A. Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hensley v. Dobbs et al
as 1:2021cv00113
Plaintiff:
Justin Ronald Hensley
Defendant:
Mark Dobbs and Unknown Morgan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tripp v. Augustine et al
as 4:2020cv04116
Defendant:
John Benting, Richard Vestlie, Michael Leidhotl and others
Plaintiff:
Kevin Christopher Micheal Tripp
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tripp v. Cook et al
as 4:2020cv04021
Defendant:
Jennifer Driski, Kyle Bender, Eugiene Regier and others
Plaintiff:
Kevin Christopher Micheal Tripp
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.
