Cases 61 - 70 of 385
JONES v. USA
as 3:2022cv00170
Petitioner:
BRIAN JONES
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
BAUGH v. CENTURION HEALTH et al
as 2:2022cv00483
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM E. BAUGH
Defendant:
CENTURION HEALTH, BRIDGE WATERS, P. PEREZ and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HATCHER v. KNIGHT et al
as 1:2022cv01944
Plaintiff:
JESSIE HATCHER
Defendant:
WENDY KNIGHT, RANSOM, A. RICHEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STERLING v. TUMEY et al
as 2:2022cv00428
Plaintiff:
DEVON STERLING
Defendant:
TUMEY, K. WASKOM, HOLCOMB and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BISHOP v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2022cv01927
Plaintiff:
JEREMY ANDREW BISHOP
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, GEO GROUP, INC., J. JONES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2022cv01926
Petitioner:
BRIAN JONES
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
BYCKETT v. JONES et al
as 2:2022cv00377
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS BYCKETT
Defendant:
ROBERT JONES, MILLER and PREA COORDINATOR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TESKY v. PUTNAMVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 2:2022cv00375
Plaintiff:
JASON ALAN TESKY
Defendant:
PUTNAMVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, DUNN, M MORRIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SCHROCK JR. v. LEWIS et al
as 1:2022cv01697
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW ALAN SHROCK JR. and MATTHEW ALAN SCHROCK, JR.
Defendant:
GARY LEWIS, SPIEGAL, JONES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. MARION COUNTY JAIL et al
as 1:2022cv01645
Plaintiff:
AUSTIN M. JONES
Defendant:
MARION COUNTY JAIL and WELLPATH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
