Cases 21 - 30 of 32
FIELDS v. LYNCH
as 2:2016cv00418
Petitioner:
SHERMAN LAMONT FIELDS
Respondent:
LORETTA LYNCH and WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
HICKS et al v. DANIELS et al
as 2:2016cv00416
Defendant:
BETTS, CARMICHAEL, CHARLES DANIELS and others
Plaintiff:
MARQUIS HICKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
PINSON v. DANIELS et al
as 2:2016cv00401
Defendant:
BETTS, CARMICHAEL, CHARLES DANIELS and others
Plaintiff:
MARQUIS HICKS, JONATHAN JONES and JEREMY PINSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
BUSTILLO v. DANIELS, et al
as 2:2016cv00007
Defendant:
ATEBERRY, J BAKER, MAYOR BALLARD and others
Plaintiff:
FERNANDO BUSTILLO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DURY v. DANIALS et al
as 2:2015cv00217
Defendant:
BOATRIGHT, CHARLES A. DANIALS, D. EZEKIEL and others
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW JAMES DURY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DURY v. DANIELS et al
as 2:2015cv00210
Defendant:
CHARLES A. DANIELS, C. JONES, MOORE and others
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW JAMES DURY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
BUSTILLO v. ROYER et al
as 2:2015cv00098
Plaintiff:
FERNANDO BUSTILLO
Defendant:
T. JENSEN, HEATHER MATTA, G. ROGERS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
JONES v. BROWNING, et al.
as 2:2015cv00076
Defendant:
R. BROWNING and J. SHERMAN
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL EUGENE JONES, JR.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. SHERMAN et al
as 2:2015cv00058
Defendant:
CARMICHAEL, KRAMER, RUPSKA and others
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL EUGENE JONES, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
FIELDS v. USP TERRE HAUTE
as 2:2014cv00315
Petitioner:
SHERMAN LAMONT FIELDS
Respondent:
WARDEN USP TERRE HAUTE
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.
