Cases 1 - 10 of 332
Jones v. Tibbs et al
as 5:2024cv00159
Defendant:
Lt. Timothy Tibbs and John/Jane Doe
Plaintiff:
Joseph Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dane v. Bayless
as 5:2024cv00157
Petitioner:
John Dane
Respondent:
Melissa Bayless
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Simpson v. Bayliss
as 5:2024cv00154
Respondent:
Melissa Bayliss
Petitioner:
John Simpson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Warren v. BOP Warden Ms. Ray et al
as 3:2024cv00101
Plaintiff:
Lamont Warren and Lamont Lee Warren
Defendant:
Jane Doe, John Doe, BOP Warden Ms. Ray and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Lovett et al
as 5:2024cv00140
Defendant:
John Doe, Shiek and S. Lovett
Plaintiff:
Nathen Earl Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Spinks v. John does and Janes et al
as 5:2024cv00133
Respondent:
Ms. Ray, SHU Officers, Unknown Official and others
Petitioner:
Joseph Spinks and Joseph Andrew Spinks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shields v. Tibbs et al
as 5:2024cv00129
Plaintiff:
Jacob Shields
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe and Lt. Timothy Tibbs
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MacColl v. Bayless
as 5:2024cv00125
Respondent:
M.J. Bayless
Petitioner:
John C. MacColl
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Posey v. West Virginia Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al
as 5:2024cv00123
Defendant:
Nancy E. Oldaker, John/Jane Doe, Heather Gross and others
Plaintiff:
Dakota Allen Posey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Spinks v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 5:2024cv00124
Plaintiff:
Joseph Spinks
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons, A/W Ray and John does and Janes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
