Cases 171 - 180 of 17,820
Acosta v. Bracy
as 3:2024cv00201
Petitioner:
Angelo Bobby Acosta
Respondent:
Warden Charmain Bracy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Holmes v. Davis et al
as 3:2024cv00091
Plaintiff:
Brian Isiah Holmes, Jr.
Defendant:
Mike Davis and Chaplain Alfred Marcus
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Johnson v. Manns et al
as 2:2024cv01368
Plaintiff:
Alfred A. Johnson, Sr.
Defendant:
Officer T Manns, Officer Halib Kahn, Annette Chambers-Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bell v. Deegan et al
as 1:2024cv00039
Plaintiff:
Markus Antonio Bell
Defendant:
Michael J. Deegan, All of (S.O.C.F.) Southern Ohio Corrections, Widdowson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Penland v. Flowers et al
as 2:2024cv00676
Plaintiff:
Alex Penland
Defendant:
Lieutenant Flowers, Matthew Johnson, Zachary Gould and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fenderson v. United States of America
as 1:2024cv00566
Petitioner:
Markell Fenderson
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Woodley Sr. v. Young et al
as 2:2024cv00669
Plaintiff:
Jamal F. Woodley Sr.
Defendant:
David C Young, Evan Poole, Toure' McCord and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davison v. City of Lorain et al.
as 1:2024cv00227
Plaintiff:
Andrew J. Davison
Defendant:
City of Lorain, Cielo Rodriguez, Mallory Santiago and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Peterson v. Obert et al.
as 1:2024cv00543
Plaintiff:
Isaac Peterson
Defendant:
Magistrate Lisa Obert, Bailiff Jim, Priest Dominic Coletta and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Peterson v. Landhandle
as 1:2024cv00542
Plaintiff:
Isaac Peterson
Defendant:
Sheriff Kasey Landhandle
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.
