Cases 31 - 40 of 373
Haynes v. Andrewjeski et al
as 4:2023cv05028
Petitioner:
Clay V Haynes
Respondent:
Melissa Andrewjeski and Bob Furgeson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Alvin Hegge v. Jay Inslee, et al
as 23-35112
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALVIN L HEGGE
Defendant / Appellee:
JAY INSLEE, ROBERT FERGUSON, TODD COLEMAN and others
Baker v. Strange et al
as 3:2023cv05072
Plaintiff:
David Michael Aaron Baker
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange, James Key, Ron Haynes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Reginald Wilton v. Tomas Fithian, et al
as 23-35012
Plaintiff / Appellant:
REGINALD WAYNE WILTON
Defendant / Appellee:
TOMAS FITHIAN, RONALD HAYNES, DENISE BREWER and others
(HC) Haynes v. Merchant
as 2:2023cv00003
Petitioner:
Michael D. Haynes
Respondent:
J. Merchant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Clayton v. Strange et al
as 3:2022cv06015
Plaintiff:
James Edward Clayton and Okie Redpaw
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange, Casey Kaech, Lara Stick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Alvin Hegge v. Jay Inslee, et al
as 22-36054
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALVIN HEGGE, Representative under Fed R Civ P Rule 23(a)
Defendant / Appellee:
JAY INSLEE, ROBERT FERGUSON, TODD COLEMAN and others
Jackson v. Goodwin et al
as 3:2022cv05959
Plaintiff:
Jackson Jerell and Jerell Marshon Jackson
Defendant:
Todd E Goodwin, Sgt Brian Schuetter, Gina Penrose and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Don Moore v. Ron Haynes
as 22-35984
Petitioner / Appellant:
DON ARTHUR MOORE
Respondent / Appellee:
RON HAYNES, Superintendent of Stafford Creek Corrections Center
Headrick v. Haynes
as 3:2022cv05895
Petitioner:
John Griffin Headrick
Respondent:
Cheryl Strange and Ron Haynes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
