Cases 1 - 10 of 1,237
Moore v. Williams et al
as 3:2024cv00249
Plaintiff:
Evan Eugene Moore
Defendant:
Kenneth Williams, Barrett, Joseph Benson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv03557
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Gray v. Milan F.D.C. et al
as 2:2024cv11531
Plaintiff:
TyJuan Gray
Defendant:
Milan F.D.C., Aulepp Kristine, Dawn Barrett and others
Ordonez Vega v. Paramore et al
as 3:2024cv00538
Plaintiff:
Luis Ordonez Vega
Defendant:
Walter H. Paramore, III, Jeremy Barrett Smith, Michael Bornstein and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Charles Jordan v. J. Barves, et al
as 24-2030
Plaintiff:
CHARLES JEROME JORDAN
Defendant:
J. BARVES, Lieutenant FCI-Schuylkill, J. PUMPHREY, Lieutenant FCI-Schuylkill, LT. BARDO and others
Duncan v. Adams
as 4:2024cv00778
Petitioner:
Barrett N. Duncan
Respondent:
Richard Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Self, Carl v. Cromwell, Dan et al
as 3:2024cv00365
Plaintiff:
Carl F. Self
Defendant:
Dan Cromwell, Timothy Thomas, Anna Barrett and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McMullan v. Tanner et al
as 1:2024cv00163
Plaintiff:
William B. McMullan
Defendant:
Joel Tanner, Shane Bozeman, William Barrett and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walker v. Warden, RRM Orlando
as 6:2024cv00955
Petitioner:
Richard Barrett Dale Walker
Respondent:
Warden, RRM Orlando
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Walker v. Peters
as 6:2024cv00943
Petitioner:
Richard Barrett Dale Walker
Respondent:
Warden, RRM Orlando
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
