Cases 21 - 29 of 29
WARREN v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 2:2012cv00320
Defendant:
F. TIMOTHY COLEMAN, JOYCE K. CONLEY, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and others
Plaintiff:
RICHARD EUGENE WARREN
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Warren v. Holder et al
as 3:2012cv02680
Plaintiff:
Richard Eugene Warren
Defendant:
Eric Holder, Joyce Zoldak, William G Stewart, II and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, Federal Filers (Bivens)
NEAL v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2012cv00101
Defendant:
TERESER A. BANKS, F. TIMOTHY COLEMAN, CHRISTOPHER A. GREINER and others
Interested Party:
JO ANN BARNHART and LONNIE G. SCHMIDT
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
NEAL v. COLEMAN et al
as 2:2012cv00040
Defendant:
F TIMOTHY COLEMAN, JANE DOE, JOHN DOE and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT DAVID NEAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Carpenter v. Commonwealth of Kentucky et al
as 1:2011cv00134
Plaintiff:
Jeffery L. Carpenter
Defendant:
Commonwealth of Kentucky, Department of Public Advocacy, George Greg Seelig and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Brandon v. Musoff et al
as 1:2010cv09017
Plaintiff:
Douglas C. Brandon
Defendant:
Jay K. Musoff, Timothy Coleman, Marsh McLennan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brandon v. Musoff et al
as 0:2010cv00030
Plaintiff:
Douglas C. Brandon
Defendant:
Jay K. Musoff, Timothy Coleman and Marsh McLennan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CLEVELAND v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2009cv04603
Plaintiff:
TIMOTHY COLEMAN
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT and A.T.F.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2007cv01536
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
