Cases 191 - 200 of 3,650
Inman v. USA
as 8:2023cv00251
Petitioner:
Tracy Inman
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Robinson v. Carson et al
as 8:2023cv00137
Plaintiff:
Kirk D. Robinson
Defendant:
Ryan Carson, John Marsh, Gerald Jorgensen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mena-Valdez v. USA
as 8:2023cv00246
Petitioner:
Jose Mena-Valdez
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Cleveland v. Vision Electric et al
as 8:2023cv00135
Plaintiff:
Markus LaVelle Cleveland
Defendant:
Vision Electric, Mr. Maier and Samantha
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ballard v. Boyd et al
as 8:2023cv00178
Plaintiff:
Kevin L. Ballard
Defendant:
Taggert Boyd, Shane Thurman and Dr. Danial Danaher
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rooks-Byrd v. Jeffreys
as 8:2023cv00147
Petitioner:
Antonio D. Rooks-Byrd
Respondent:
Rob Jeffreys
Interested Party:
Nebraska Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jennings v. Gamble et al
as 8:2023cv00181
Petitioner:
LeAndre R. Jennings
Respondent:
Craig Gamble and Rob Jefferies
Interested Party:
Nebraska Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Griffin v. Micheal-Meyers
as 8:2023cv00130
Petitioner:
Arthur T. Griffin, Jr.
Respondent:
Micheal-Meyers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Maati v. Johnson et al
as 8:2023cv00117
Plaintiff:
Amikhet En Maati
Defendant:
Brad Johnson, Lancaster County Dept. of Corr., Mr. Levitt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Peterson v. USA
as 8:2023cv00209
Petitioner:
Nicole Peterson
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
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.
