Cases 21 - 30 of 270
Onterio Brown v. Harold Clarke
as 21-7000
Petitioner / Appellant:
ONTERIO DIMITRI BROWN
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE
Jack Vigue v. Harold Clarke
as 21-6907
Defendant / Appellee:
RICHARD H. PENCE, Counselor, MAILROOM SUPERVISOR, GRIEVANCE COORDINATOR and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JACK RAY VIGUE
Demmerick Brown v. Harold Clarke
as 21-6903
Petitioner / Appellant:
DEMMERICK ERIC BROWN, a/k/a Denrick Eric Brown
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE
LeAnthony Winston v. Harold Clarke
as 21-6851
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE
Petitioner / Appellant:
LEANTHONY WINSTON
Michael Gorbey v. Harold Clarke
as 21-6800
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections
Petitioner / Appellant:
MICHAEL S. GORBEY
Uhuru' Obataiye-Allah v. VDOC
as 21-6788
Defendant / Appellee:
VIRGINIA STATE POLICE, HAROLD W. CLARKE, R. MURPHY, Lieutenant and others
Defendant:
MICHAEL DUKE, Special Investigator and W. STOVE
Plaintiff / Appellant:
UHURU' SEKOU OBATAIYE-ALLAH
Frankie Miller, Jr. v. Harold Clarke
as 21-6692
Petitioner / Appellant:
FRANKIE M. MILLER, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections
David Meyers v. Petersburg Circuit Court
as 21-6662
Defendant / Appellee:
BENJAMIN RATZ, JOSEPH M. TEEFY, Judge, ATTORNEY TERRY DRISKILL and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
Michael Gorbey v. Harold Clarke
as 21-6654
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections
Petitioner / Appellant:
MICHAEL S. GORBEY
Michael Tory v. Clint Davis
as 21-6649
Defendant / Appellee:
A. DAVID ROBINSON, MARCUS ELAM, Regional Administrator for Western Region of the Virginia Department of Corrections, LIEUTENANT B. MITCHELL, Correctional Officer and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL ELLERY TORY
Defendant:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
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.
