Cases 101 - 110 of 149
Sara Otrusina v. Chris Crysler, et al
as 11-2620
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SARA OTRUSINA
Defendant - Appellee:
CHRIS CRYSLER, Acting Deputy Warden, PATRICIA CARUSO, HEIDI WASHINGTON, Warden, and others
USA v. Robert Lippert
as 11-36034
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
ROBERT SCOTT LIPPERT
Anderson v. Edwards, et al
as 11-1542
Petitioner - Appellant:
ROBERT SCOTT ANDERSON
Respondent - Appellee:
VINCE EDWARDS and COLORADO ATTORNEY GENERAL
ISBY-ISRAEL v. SUPERINTENDENT, WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 1:2011cv01155
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC., DIETITION OF THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, FOODSERVICE DIRECTOR OF THE WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY and others
Plaintiff:
AARON ISBY-ISRAEL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Anderson v. Edwards et al
as 1:2011cv02155
Petitioner:
Robert Scott Anderson
Respondent:
Vince Edwards and Colorado Attorney General Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PHILLIPS v. GALLAGHER
as 4:2011cv00345
Plaintiff:
LISA A PHILLIPS
Defendant:
GWENDOLYN F GALLAGHER, ROBERT SCOTT GALLAGHER, MIKE WYATT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SCOTT et al v. THOMPSON et al
as 5:2011cv03282
Petitioner:
ROBERT SCOTT
Respondent:
BRIAN THOMPSON, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF NORTHAMPTON and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Paig v. Yates
as 2:2011cv00552
Petitioner:
Robert Scott Paig
Respondent:
James Yates
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Robert Strong v. Joe De Camp
as 11-35161
Petitioner - Appellant:
ROBERT SCOTT STRONG
Respondent - Appellee:
JOE DE CAMP, Superintendent, DRCI
Gary Glidden v. Lawrence Kelly, et al
as 11-60112
Petitioner - Appellant:
GARY ALLEN GLIDDEN
Respondent - Appellee:
LAWRENCE KELLY, Superintendent and ROBERT SCOTT, Warden
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.
