Cases 21 - 30 of 9,806
RAMOS v. RACHEL THOMPSON
as 1:2024cv06645
Petitioner:
CHRISTIAN RAMOS
Respondent:
RACHEL THOMPSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Thompson v. Warden of Livesay Correctional Institution
as 1:2024cv03331
Plaintiff:
James Henry Thompson, II
Defendant:
The State of South Carolina
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thompson v. Washington et al
as 2:2024cv00779
Plaintiff:
Solomon Xavier Thompson
Defendant:
Department of Enterprise Corrections Division, Brian Washington, Keri Walters and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thompson v. United States of America
as 5:2024cv00557
Petitioner:
Dewayne Antwon Thompson
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Thompson v. Haper et al
as 1:2024cv00105
Plaintiff:
Terrique Thompson
Defendant:
Unknown Haper, Unknown Womack, C. Price and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thompson v. Schererville Police Department et al
as 2:2024cv00198
Defendant:
Schererville Police Department, Schererville Police Dept, Parker and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Thompson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thompson v. Schererville Police Department et al
as 3:2024cv00448
Defendant:
Schererville Police Department, Schererville Police Dept, Parker and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Thompson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Raymond Thompson v. Joshua Cockrell, et al
as 24-2120
Plaintiff:
Raymond Thompson
Defendant:
Joshua Cockrell and Robert Gerholdt
Thompson v. Wilshire
as 2:2024cv00268
Plaintiff:
Maurice-Edward: Thompson
Defendant:
S. Wilshire
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thompson v. Michigan, State of
as 2:2024cv11426
Petitioner:
Misty Leann Thompson
Respondent:
Michigan, State of
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.
