Cases 31 - 40 of 67
Conwell v. Marvin et al
as 3:2018cv00131
Plaintiff:
Luke Conwell
Defendant:
Marcus Marvin, Nurse Hope, Lt. Pickford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CONWELL v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 1:2017cv01868
Petitioner:
CHRIS CONWELL
Miscellaneou:
PENDLETON CF (Court Use Only)
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CONWELL v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 1:2017cv01869
Petitioner:
CHRIS CONWELL
Miscellaneou:
PENDLETON CF (Court Use Only)
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rochester v. Conwell et al
as 6:2017cv00749
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
Tammie Conwell, Liz Sexton, J Edmund and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Adrian Eaglin v. McCall
as 16-7171
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ADRIAN T. EAGLIN
Defendant - Appellee:
MCCALL, Sergeant
Defendant:
LARRY CARTLEDGE, Warden, FLORENCE MAUNEY, Assistant Warden, CURTIS EARLLY and others
Winding v. Dunn et al
as 5:2016cv00005
Plaintiff:
Marcus DeAnthony Winding
Defendant:
Terry Dunn, Gerald Conwell and Natchez Adams County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Conwell v. The County of Cook et al
as 1:2015cv09970
Plaintiff:
Luke Conwell
Defendant:
The County of Cook, Gavin and Yu Do Yank
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eaglin v. Sterling et al
as 0:2014cv04003
Plaintiff:
Adrian T Eaglin
Defendant:
Bryant Sterling, Larry Cartledge, Florence Mauney and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
John Baccus v. William Byars, Jr.
as 14-6955
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN ROOSEVELT BACCUS, a/k/a John Roosevelt Baccus
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM BYARS, JR., SCDC Director, LARRY CARTLEDGE, PCI Warden, NC MERCHANT, PCI Mailroom Manager and others
John Baccus v. N C Merchant
as 14-6912
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN ROOSEVELT BACCUS
Defendant - Appellee:
NC MERCHANT and TAMARA CONWELL
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.
