Cases 201 - 210 of 6,410
Koehn v. Boncher
as 1:2023cv11049
Petitioner:
Joseph A Koehn
Respondent:
Warden Amy Boncher
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Russo v. DaSilva et al
as 1:2023cv10977
Plaintiff:
Richard R Russo
Defendant:
Bryan DaSilva, Sergeant Zielinski, Everett Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv11114
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Turner v. Mici et al
as 1:2023cv10669
Plaintiff:
Wayman Turner
Defendant:
Carol A. Mici, Matthew Divris and Jeffrey Bussiere
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv11114
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Caruso v. USA DO NOT DOCKET IN THIS CASE - ALL FILINGS TO BE MADE IN CRIMINAL CASE (1:21-cr-10312-DJC)
as 1:2023cv11098
Petitioner:
Vincent Caruso
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Thomas
as 1:2023cv10789
Plaintiff:
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Defendant:
Terrence Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Nunez v. USA
as 1:2023cv11019
Petitioner:
Ysrael Nunez
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Long v. USA DO NOT DOCKET IN THIS CASE - ALL ENTRIES ARE TO BE MADE IN CRIMINAL CASE 09-cr-10210
as 1:2023cv11011
Petitioner:
Dimitri Long
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Pena v. Boncher et al
as 1:2023cv10807
Petitioner:
Radhames Pena
Respondent:
Amy Boncher
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
