Cases 11 - 20 of 35
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00093
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00088
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
CHRISTIE v. KUTA et al
as 3:2018cv00050
Petitioner:
OSMOND O'NEIL CHRISTIE
Respondent:
S. M. KUTA and GEO GROUP, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv00204
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BERGAL v. KUTA et al
as 3:2017cv00067
Plaintiff:
GOKHAN BERGAL
Defendant:
S. M. KUTA and GEO GROUP INCORPORATED
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SANDOVAL v. GEO GROUP, INC. et al
as 3:2017cv00011
Petitioner:
HECTOR SANDOVAL
Respondent:
GEO GROUP, INC., SEAN M. KUTA and CARRIE GUIHER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
HIDALGO NEIRA v. GEO GROUP, INC. et al
as 3:2016cv00081
Plaintiff:
JORGE HUMBERTO HIDALGO NEIRA
Defendant:
GEO GROUP, INC., SEAN M. KUTA, NORENE GREENLEAF and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
DUARTE v. CURRENT DIRECTOR OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 3:2016cv00061
Plaintiff:
LUIS DUARTE
Defendant:
CURRENT DIRECTOR OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ALL UNKNOWN BOP OFFICERS, ALL UNKNOWN FEDERAL AGENTS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
DAVIS v. SAMUELS et al
as 3:2016cv00045
Plaintiff:
BRIAN A. DAVIS
Defendant:
CHARLES S. SAMUELS, ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU OF PRISONS, GEO GROUP, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SALEH v. CURRENT DIRECTOR OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 3:2016cv00030
Plaintiff:
MAHMOUD M. SALEH
Defendant:
CURRENT DIRECTOR OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, CURRENT GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, JOHN SOBEL 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.
