Cases 21 - 30 of 55
Restricted Filer- Paulcin v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2017cv22916
Plaintiff:
Prophet Restricted Filer - Paulcin
Defendant:
Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Tom Reimers, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Logan v. Clemmons et al
as 3:2017cv00765
Plaintiff:
James Alexander Logan
Defendant:
M.C. Clemmons, F.W. Mock, Melissa L. Comerford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DRINKARD v. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 3:2017cv00338
Defendant:
LOGAN DRINKARD
Respondent:
SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Logan v. Hall et al
as 3:2017cv00462
Plaintiff:
James Alexander Logan
Defendant:
William Hall, Michael Eppeny, Hoss Shook and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Blazejowski v. France et al
as 3:2016cv01374
Plaintiff:
Tawny Blazejowski, Kayla Blazejowski, Paul Blazejowski, Jr. and others
Defendant:
Chris France, David Tarbert, Michael Traynor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Zack v. United States of America
as 2:2016cv14287
Petitioner:
Scott Logan Zack
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Logan v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections et al
as 9:2016cv80766
Plaintiff:
Dexter Bernard Logan
Defendant:
Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections and Florida Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
THOMPSON v. AUSTIN et al
as 5:2015cv00283
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW JOHN THOMPSON
Defendant:
AUSTIN, DEESE and J D LOGAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LOGAN v. JONES et al.
as 3:2015cv00437
Plaintiff:
WILLIE LOGAN
Defendant:
JULIE L JONES and SCOTT MIDDLEBROOKS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Logan v. Sanchez-Vivas et al
as 3:2015cv01024
Plaintiff:
James Alexander Logan
Defendant:
R. Sanchez-Vivas and D. Varghese
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.
