Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Diaz v. Schwartz et al
as 5:2018cv00289
Plaintiff:
Juan Diaz, Jr.
Defendant:
E. Schwartz and John/Jane Does
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Diaz v. Miller et al
as 5:2018cv00288
Plaintiff:
Juan Diaz, Jr.
Defendant:
G. Miller and John/Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Diaz v. Schwartz
as 5:2018cv00044
Plaintiff:
Juan Diaz, Jr.
Defendant:
E. Schwartz and Unknown Correctional Officer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Diaz v. Massachusetts Department of Correction et al
as 1:2016cv11894
Plaintiff:
Juan Diaz, Jr
Defendant:
Massachusetts Department of Correction, Thomas Turco, Carol Micci and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Diaz v. Ebbert et al
as 1:2016cv01904
Plaintiff:
Juan Diaz, Jr.
Defendant:
David J Ebbert, J.L. Norwood, Ian Connors and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Diaz v. Pigos et al
as 1:2016cv01905
Plaintiff:
Juan Diaz, Jr.
Defendant:
Kevin Pigos and F. Alama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Juan Diaz, Jr. v. Director Federal Bureau of Pri, et al
as 14-4676
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JUAN DIAZ, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
DIRECTOR FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, REGIONAL DIRECTOR and others
Juan Diaz, Jr. v. Warden Lewisburg USP, et al
as 14-4041
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JUAN DIAZ, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
WARDEN LEWISBURG USP, REGIONAL MEDICAL DIRECTOR, Name Unknown, H.S.A. S BROWN and others
Juan Diaz, Jr. v. Attorney General United States, et al
as 13-1869
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JUAN DIAZ, JR.
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
CHARLES SAMUEL, Director for F.B.O.P., HARRELL WATTS, General Counsel for F.B.O.P., J. L. NORWOOD, Federal Bureau of Prisons and others
Diaz v. Holder et al
as 1:2012cv02520
Plaintiff:
Juan Diaz, Jr.
Defendant:
Eric Holder, Charles Samuels, Jr., Harell Watts and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
