Cases 101 - 110 of 685
WRIGHT v. WATSON et al
as 2:2021cv00215
Defendant:
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, U.S. PROSECUTOR OF SAN ANTONIO, TX and T. J. WATSON
Plaintiff:
MARCUS D. WRIGHT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Cargill v. U.S. Marshals et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2021cv00285
Defendant:
U.S. Attorney General, Department of Justice and U.S. Marshals
Plaintiff:
Quincetta Cargill and Quincetta Y. Cargill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bess v. U.S. Attorney General et al
as 1:2021cv21352
Defendant:
U.S. Attorney General, Joseph Brown and Secretary, D.H.S.
Plaintiff:
Danroy Bess
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Young v. United States et al
as 2:2021cv01407
Defendant:
U.S. Attorney General, United States and Dept. of Justice
Plaintiff:
Timothy Doyle Young
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Miles v. U.S. Attorney General
as 1:2021cv00605
Defendant:
U.S. Attorney General
Plaintiff:
Kelvin J. Miles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Effs v. U.S. Attorney General et al
as 2:2021cv00182
Respondent:
Secretary D.H.S., Officer in charge at Krome Detention Center and U.S Attorney General
Petitioner:
Leslie Effs
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Bess v. U.S. Atty General et al
as 2:2021cv00117
Petitioner:
Danroy Bess
Respondent:
Secretary, D.H.S. and U.S Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
EL-AMIN v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL et al
as 1:2021cv00393
Defendant:
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL and U.S. ATTORNEY
Plaintiff:
SALEEM EL-AMIN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Effs v. U.S. Attorney General et al
as 1:2021cv20554
Defendant:
U.S. Attorney General, Secretary D.H.S. and Officer in charge at Krome Detention Center
Plaintiff:
Leslie Effs
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Allen v. Warden, Baker County Dentention Center
as 3:2021cv00136
Petitioner:
Joseph E. Allen
Respondent:
U.S. Attorney General and Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
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.
