Cases 1 - 10 of 69
Fleming v. Easley
as 4:2024cv04023
Petitioner:
Thomas Fleming
Respondent:
Sheriff Wayne Easley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mack v. Easley
as 4:2024cv04016
Petitioner:
Malcolm C. Mack
Respondent:
Warden Jeffie Walker and Sheriff Wayne Easley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Wilder v. Evers et al
as 5:2024hc02059
Petitioner:
Lawrence Verline Wilder
Respondent:
Administrator Evers, Ed McMahon, Benjamin David and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Taylor (ID 40516) v. Easley
as 5:2023cv03203
Petitioner:
Ernest L. Taylor
Respondent:
Kansas, State of and Tim Easley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Easley v. Young
as 5:2023cv00053
Plaintiff:
Chad Everette Easley
Defendant:
Warden Herbert Young
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Kenneth J. Easley v. St Andre
as 5:2023cv00843
Petitioner:
Kenneth J. Easley
Respondent:
W St Andre
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Easley v. Brown
as 5:2023cv00083
Petitioner:
Justin Easley
Respondent:
Warden Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Easley v. Warden
as 3:2023cv00032
Petitioner:
William Howard Easley and William Easley
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pierce (ID 58077) v. Easley
as 5:2023cv03023
Petitioner:
Christopher Pierce
Respondent:
Tim Easley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pierce (ID 58077) v. Easley
as 5:2022cv03307
Petitioner:
Christopher Pierce
Respondent:
Tim Easley
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.
