Cases 131 - 140 of 47,890
Davis v. Diss et al
as 1:2024cv10676
Plaintiff:
Terrell James Davis, Jr.
Defendant:
Greg Sticka, Adam C Diss and Joeseph Navarro
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sanchez-Valencia v. F C I Oakdale II
as 2:2024cv01421
Defendant:
Warden F C I Oakdale II
Plaintiff:
Francisco Sanchez-Valencia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Reavis v. Darden et al
as 5:2024ct03257
Defendant:
C/O Sadler, C/O William, Ms. Johnson and others
Plaintiff:
Brian A. Reavis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Samuelson v. Hagerman et al
as 4:2024cv00993
Defendant:
Thomas A. Wilder and Judge David C Hagerman
Plaintiff:
Michael Dean Samuelson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Valentinis-Dee v. McMannis et al
as 4:2024cv03943
Defendant:
Trevon McMannis, Montgomery County Sheriff Dept, Brenda C Farhi and others
Plaintiff:
James Valentinis-Dee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Flint v. U.S.P. Hazelton et al
as 3:2024cv00138
Defendant:
U.S.P. Hazelton, E. Young, Nurse C. Chipolinski and others
Plaintiff:
Mark Louis Flint, II
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
(PC) Abreu v. Bridgett
as 2:2024cv02853
Defendant:
Stephanie A. Bridgett
Plaintiff:
Blue F. C. Abreu
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CONRAD v. GABBY et al
as 5:2024cv00237
Defendant:
REGISTER
Respondent:
MILES, MARIANNA F C I and GABBY
Petitioner:
DAVID CONRAD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
CONRAD v. GARRY et al
as 5:2024cv00238
Respondent:
MARIANNA F C I, MAT and GARRY
Petitioner:
DAVID CONRAD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
SHORT v. WELLS
as 3:2024cv00503
Plaintiff:
STEVEN W SHORT
Defendant:
KELVIN C WELLS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
