Prisoner Petitions Cases filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana Before Judge Mark Dinsmore
Cases 1 - 10 of 3,470
HUNTER v. WARDEN
as 1:2024cv01071
Petitioner: EUGENE HUNTER
Respondent: WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DURHAM v. WADAS
as 2:2024cv00318
Petitioner: AKIEM DURHAM
Respondent: WADAS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PHILLIPS v. LEFFLER et al
as 2:2024cv00313
Plaintiff: JAMES E. PHILLIPS
Defendant: LEFFLER, K. PADGETT, CRANE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SCOTT v. CENTERION CORPERATION et al
as 1:2024cv01021
Plaintiff: EDDRELL SCOTT
Defendant: CENTERION CORPERATION, VERDON, ALLEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MULLIS v. PRETORIOUS
as 2:2024cv00315
Petitioner: BRETT DEWAYNE MULLIS
Respondent: TRICIA PRETORIOUS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BLAKLEY v. VANIHEL et al
as 2:2024cv00312
Plaintiff: CHARLES BLAKLEY
Defendant: FRANK VANIHEL, K. VINARDI, K. GILMORE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
COMPTON v. GALIPEAU
as 1:2024cv01016
Petitioner: DANIEL COMPTON
Respondent: GALIPEAU
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PARKER v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2024cv00307
Plaintiff: GEORGE A. PARKER
Defendant: INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CHRISTINA REAGLE, TRICIA PRETORIUS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LOCKETT v. ARAMARK et al
as 1:2024cv01005
Plaintiff: CHRISTOPHER LOCKETT
Defendant: ARAMARK, FOX, FOSTER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. PRETORIUS
as 2:2024cv00299
Petitioner: DANIEL SMITH
Respondent: TRICIA PRETORIUS
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.


Why Is My Information Online?