Cases 1 - 10 of 28
FAULKNER v. UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICES
as 1:2020cv00163
Respondent:
UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICES
Petitioner:
ALVIN FAULKNER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
BATES et al v. DEWINE et al
as 1:2020cv00040
Respondent:
PAUL IRVING, BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, MICHAEL R. PENCE and others
Petitioner:
R. LOTUS JUSTICE, RACHAEL N. PARKS, CLAYTON M. BATES and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
SHULER v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
as 1:2019cv02343
Plaintiff:
MCALLEN HOSPITAL, L.P., MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE GROUP, INC., SARASOTA DOCTORS HOSPITAL, INC. and others
Petitioner:
LAMONT DERRICK SHULER
Respondent:
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
KAKESA v. U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE et al
as 1:2018cv01701
Petitioner:
MINANGA KAKESA
Respondent:
U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE and D.C. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
CHASE v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2017cv00274
Plaintiff:
DENNIS CHASE
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE , EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR U.S. ATTORNEYS and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
SANCHEZ v. LYNCH et al
as 1:2016cv02395
Petitioner:
FERNANDO SANCHEZ
Respondent:
LORETTA E. LYNCH and UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
DOBSON v. LYNCH et al
as 1:2016cv01635
Plaintiff:
KASEEN DOBSON
Defendant:
LORETTA E. LYNCH and U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
HILLS v. LYNCH et al
as 1:2016cv01072
Petitioner:
DERRICK HILLS
Respondent:
LORETTA LYNCH and UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
GARZA v. MARTINEZ et al
as 1:2015cv01744
Petitioner:
GUADALUPE GARZA, JR.
Respondent:
MARTINEZ, BEMENT and UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
EVANS v. U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE
as 1:2015cv01612
Petitioner:
WILLIAM H. EVANS, JR.
Respondent:
U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
