Cases 11 - 20 of 108
DAVIS v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2019cv02905
Defendant:
THE WASHINGTON POST NEWS PAPER, THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEDERAL CIRCUIT, ATTORNEY DAVID BARRISH and others
Plaintiff:
KIETH DAVIS and KEITH DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Chicago Police Department et al
as 1:2019cv04080
Defendant:
Thomas, Garcia, Gubala and others
Plaintiff:
Keith Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Dart et al
as 1:2019cv04079
Defendant:
Thomas J. Dart
Plaintiff:
Keith Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2019cv22263
Plaintiff:
Keith Davis
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
DAVIS v. PHILADELPHIA DEPARTMENT OF PRISONS WARDEN et al
as 2:2018cv03033
Respondent:
PHILADELPHIA DEPARTMENT OF PRISONS WARDEN, JUDGE NAZARIO JIMINEZ, THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT THIRD CIRCUIT AND ITS APPEALS COURT and others
Petitioner:
KEITH DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Keith Davis v. Anthony Eberling, et al
as 18-2033
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KEITH DAVIS
Defendant - Appellee:
ANTHONY E. EBERLING, LT. HOUSE, J. THOMAS and others
Bellamy v. Davis et al
as 3:2018cv00137
Plaintiff:
Marvin Bellamy
Defendant:
Keith Davis, Officer Smith and Officer Evans
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Eberling et al
as 3:2018cv00314
Plaintiff:
Keith Davis
Defendant:
Anthony E. Eberling, House, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gines v. Oregon Department of Corrections et al
as 6:2017cv00841
Defendant:
Carrie Coffey, Keith Davis, Brenden Magee and others
Plaintiff:
Dennis Gines
ODOC) A Political Subdivision In Charge Of The Oregon State Penitentiary (OSP:
Oregon Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Gordon
as 3:2017cv00018
Defendant:
Officer Gordon
Plaintiff:
Joshua Keith Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
