Cases 11 - 20 of 2,723
Lucas v. Kelley et al
as 9:2024cv00502
Plaintiff:
London Lucas and London H. Lucas
Defendant:
Kelley, Dr. Macri, RN Napoli and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kelley v. Schuylkill County Prison
as 3:2024cv00626
Plaintiff:
Owen James Kelley
Defendant:
Schuylkill County Prison
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROSS v. WOODCOCK et al
as 1:2024cv00110
Plaintiff:
KEVIN LEE ROSS
Defendant:
JUDGE WOODCOCK, ANDREW MCCORMACK, SCOTT KELLEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Rickie Tigue, Jr. v. Belcher, et al
as 24-1669
Plaintiff:
Ricky Lynn Tigue, Jr. and Rickie Lynn Tigue, Jr.
Defendant:
Belcher, RN, EARU, ADC, Gary Kerstein, EARU, ADC, Kelley, Lt., EARU, ADC and others
Tatum v. State of Iowa
as 4:2024cv00102
Petitioner:
Kelley Jerrell Tatum
Respondent:
State of Iowa
Interested Party:
Aaron Rogers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mosley v. CCC Center of Correctional Concern et al
as 1:2024cv01843
Plaintiff:
Johnathan N Mosley
Defendant:
CCC Center of Correctional Concern, Well Path and Mike Kelley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rodrick Brayboy v. Kullner, et al
as 24-1331
Plaintiff:
RODRICK BRAYBOY
Defendant:
KULLNER, UNIT MANAGER, ZACHARY J. MOSLACK, CHIEF HEARING EXAMINER, APPEALS OFFICE, DAYNORWICZ, PROGRAM REVIEW COMMITTEE and others
Wright v. State of Tennessee et al
as 3:2024cv00199
Plaintiff:
Danielle Lynette Wright
Defendant:
State of Tennessee, Stanley C. Dickerson, Talea Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00299
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Kelley v. Warden
as 3:2024cv00174
Plaintiff:
Chamar Kelley
Defendant:
Warden
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.
