Cases 1 - 10 of 12
K.O. et al v. SESSIONS, III et al
as 1:2020cv00309
Defendant:
ALEX AZAR, JOHN DOE CBP AGENTS, JOHN DOE ORR PERSONNEL and others
Plaintiff:
C.J., F.C., L.J. and others
Amicus Curiae:
IMMIGRATION REFORM LAW INSTITUTE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
ROUDABUSH v. HYLTON et al
as 1:2015cv01035
Plaintiff:
JAMES L. ROUDABUSH, JR.
Defendant:
HYLTON, D. LAWHORNE, STERNS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DANSER v. SAMUELS et al
as 1:2014cv00867
Plaintiff:
DAVID K. DANSER
Defendant:
GEORGE E. SAMUELS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, RODNEY W. CHANDLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CAICEDO-OBANDO v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2013cv01667
Plaintiff:
CIRO CAICEDO-OBANDO
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, J. PETROSKY, JUAN DELEON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LEAMING v. SUTER et al
as 1:2013cv00481
Plaintiff:
KENNETH WAYNE LEAMING
Defendant:
K. SUTER, GAIL JOHNSON and JACK FOX
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STEVENS v. LOCKETT et al
as 1:2012cv01219
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL T. STEVENS
Defendant:
CHARLES LOCKETT, CRAIG APKER, RHODES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
STINE v. NEWTON et al
as 1:2012cv00024
Plaintiff:
MIKEAL GLENN STINE
Defendant:
K. NEWTON, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BOOTH v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2011cv01782
Plaintiff:
SHAUN K. BOOTH
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, HARLEY LAPPIN, JOYCE K. CONLEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CHOYCE v. GROUNDS et al
as 1:2010cv01707
Plaintiff:
CHARLES RICKY CHOYCE, JR
Defendant:
DAWN E GROUNDS, JEFFERY K. CALFEE and JEFFERY W. CATOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PATEL v. PHILLIPS et al
as 1:2010cv00749
Plaintiff:
KAMAL K. PATEL
Defendant:
YVONNE PHILLIPS, HARLEY G. LAPPIN, JANE OR JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
