Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Timmy Reichling v. T.J. Fikes, et al
as 22-2366
Petitioner / Appellant:
Timmy J. Reichling
Respondent / Appellee:
T. J. Fikes, Warden, Dr. Ann LaValley-Wood, Chief Psychologist, D. Drillings, Correctional Officer and others
Respondent:
Dr. Warlick, Staff Psychologist, R. Zaudkte, Correctional Officer, T. Scullard, Correctional Officer and others
Reichling v. Fikes
as 0:2022cv00081
Petitioner:
Timmy J. Reichling
Respondent:
T.J. Fikes, Dr. Lavalley Wood, Dr. Warlick and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Cavan v. United States of America et al
as 0:2020cv01072
Defendant:
Ms. Voss, Mr. Armstrong, Dr. Bennett and others
Plaintiff:
Seui Cavan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Elliott v. Wilson et al
as 0:2015cv01908
Plaintiff:
Benjamin Elliott
Defendant:
Denise Wilson, Maerske, Lee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brown et al v. Skechers U.S.A. et al
as 4:2015cv00345
Defendant:
Skechers USA, Inc. , Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II and Skechers Fitness Group
Plaintiff:
Corey Brown , Doris Henderson-Lumpkins , Danielle Aultowski and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
LaValley v. Ecolab, Inc
as 0:2014cv03649
Defendant:
Ecolab, Inc
Plaintiff:
Scott LaValley
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Stevens v. Dayton et al
as 0:2012cv00495
Plaintiff:
Karl Godfrey Stevens
Defendant:
Mark Dayton, Lori Swanson, Cal Ludeman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Poole v. Dayton et al
as 0:2012cv00441
Plaintiff:
James Robinson Poole
Defendant:
Mark Dayton, Lori Swanson, Cal Ludeman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Norton v. Ludeman et al
as 0:2012cv00440
Plaintiff:
Russell Norton
Defendant:
Cal R. Ludeman, Lucinda Jesson, Dennis Benson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dotson v. Dayton et al
as 0:2012cv00345
Plaintiff:
Darrin Edward Dotson
Defendant:
Mark Dayton, Lori Swanson, Cal Ludeman 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.
