Cases 31 - 40 of 519
JOHNSON v. GIFFORD et al
as 1:2009cv00824
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL KEVIN JOHNSON
Defendant:
PATRICIA J. GIFFORD, STEVEN J. RUBICK, DAVID A. SHAHEED and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ELEM v. GAYMON et al
as 4:2009cv00094
Plaintiff:
JOHNELL ELEM
Defendant:
DENNIS R. GAYMON, JEFF LAMPING and T. B. SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BARKER v. HENDERSON et al
as 1:2009cv00818
Plaintiff:
DENNIS BARKER
Defendant:
DEANNA HENDERSON, RICK SCHWARTZ, SALLY CLARK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TOLER v. MARBERRY
as 4:2009cv00091
Petitioner:
GARRY L. TOLER
Respondent:
H. J. MARBERRY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
RAY v. PETERS
as 4:2009cv00087
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL RAY
Defendant:
GILBERT PETERS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SMITH v. STATE OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
as 4:2009cv00085
Plaintiff:
MARK SMITH
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION and CRAWFORD COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ROBBINS v. LAWRENCE CO. SUPERIOR I COURT et al
as 4:2009cv00084
Petitioner:
MARTIN ROBBINS
Respondent:
LAWRENCE CO. SUPERIOR I COURT and ROBBINS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WILDER v. MIZE
as 1:2009cv00677
Petitioner:
JASON D. WILDER
Respondent:
SUPT. BRETT MIZE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LONG v. DISCIPLINARY HEARING OFFICER
as 1:2009cv00652
Petitioner:
BOBBY RAY LONG
Respondent:
DISCIPLINARY HEARING OFFICER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
TIDMORE v. HANLON
as 1:2009cv00624
Petitioner:
JEREMY TIDMORE
Respondent:
THOMAS HANLON
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.
