Cases 31 - 40 of 8,434
Gines v. State of Iowa
as 4:2024cv00118
Petitioner:
Tommy Gines, Jr.
Respondent:
State of Iowa
Interested Party:
Aaron Rogers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Colliver v. Rogers
as 4:2024cv00198
Petitioner:
Erich Dwayne Colliver
Respondent:
Luke Pettigrew and David Rogers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Shawn Canada v. State of Minnesota, et al
as 24-2091
Plaintiff:
Shawn Canada
Defendant:
State of Minnesota, Paul Schnell, In his official capacity as the Commissioner of the Minnesota Dept. of Corrections, et al., Andrew Karlsen, In their official capacity as the staff of Hearing & Release unit of Minnesota Dept. of Corrections Officers and others
Rogers v. Wyoming Attorney General, et al
as 24-8038
Petitioner:
SEAN ROGERS
Respondent:
WYOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF WYOMING and WYOMING DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS STATE PENITENTIARY WARDEN, in her official capacity, AKA Neicole Molden
Murphy v. Washington et al
as 2:2024cv10945
Plaintiff:
Timothy Murphy
Defendant:
Heidi Washington, Jong Choi, Rickey Coleman and others
Rogers v. State of South Dakota et al
as 4:2024cv04071
Petitioner:
James Rogers
Respondent:
State of South Dakota, Kellie Wasko and Teresa Bittinger
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Day v. Rich et al
as 5:2024ct03135
Plaintiff:
Roger Charles Day, Jr.
Defendant:
Warden Rich, United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Rowbotham v. Bridges
as 4:2024cv00151
Petitioner:
Roger D Rowbotham
Respondent:
Carrie Bridges
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv03728
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
