Cases 41 - 50 of 32,471
White v. Commonwealth of Virginia et al
as 2:2024cv00364
Petitioner:
Michael Maurice White
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Virginia and Craig W. Stallard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Director Department Corrections
as 1:2024cv00976
Petitioner:
Herbert William Jones, Jr.
Respondent:
Director Department Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00361
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00362
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Newton v. G.E.O Group, Inc et al
as 3:2024cv00413
Plaintiff:
Earl Nicholas Newton
Defendant:
G.E.O Group, Inc, C. O. Fields, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Targonsk et al
as 2:2024cv00363
Plaintiff:
Timothy R. Smith
Defendant:
Targonsk, S. Herrick, G. Swartz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rutherford v. Unknown
as 2:2024cv00359
Plaintiff:
Timothy Rutherford
Defendant:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Diggs v. Johnson et al
as 7:2024cv00361
Plaintiff:
Anthony Lamont Diggs
Defendant:
Craig Johnson and Sgt. E.C. Browning
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Muhammad Bryant v. Commonwealth of Virginia et al
as 7:2024cv00362
Plaintiff:
Al-Akhir Islam Muhammad Bryant
Defendant:
Commonwealth Of Virginia and Virginia Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. Watson et al.
as 1:2024cv00991
Defendant:
Jamal L. Thomas, Ms. D. Watson, St. Brides Correctional Center and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
