Cases 41 - 50 of 57
Tafari v. Zerniak et al
as 9:2011cv01429
Plaintiff:
InJah Tafari
Defendant:
Theodore Zerniak, Paul Gokey, Timothy Ramsdell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shabazz v. Lewis et al
as 1:2011cv08814
Plaintiff:
Michael Aziz Zeref Shabazz
Defendant:
David L. Lewis, James Patterson, John Mills and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Flemming v. Fischer et al
as 9:2011cv01232
Plaintiff:
Woodrow Flemming
Defendant:
Brian Fischer, Albert Brook, Gerald J. Otis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kenneth Keel v. Richard Early, et al
as 11-15720
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KENNETH G. KEEL
Defendant - Appellee:
RICHARD E. EARLY, Warden, LINDA L. MELCHING, R. E. YSLAVA and others
Smith v. Rock et al
as 9:2011cv00282
Plaintiff:
Paul Smith
Defendant:
Joseph A. Rock , Richard MacWilliams , C. Rock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murray v. Tulip et al
as 9:2010cv01440
Plaintiff:
James Murray
Defendant:
T. Arquitt, Norman Bezio, B. Bogett and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Wood
as 10-2116
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Johnathan Johnson
Defendant - Appellee:
Robert Woods, Superintendent, Upstate Correctional Facility, S. Thompson, Sergeant, Upstate Correctional Facility, D. Uhler, Captain, Upstate Correctional Facility and others
Lee v. Ramsdell
as 2:2009cv00144
Plaintiff:
Christopher Joseph Lee
Defendant:
Charles Ramsdell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ramsdell v. Thomas
as 2:2009cv00951
Petitioner:
Keith W Ramsdell
Respondent:
Andrew Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Charles Daniel, Jr. v. Steven Scott, et al
as 09-35082
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHARLES DANIEL, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
STEVEN SCOTT, Judge, King County Courthouse, JEFFREY RAMSDELL, Judge, King County Courthouse, TARALYNN BATES, Court Reporter, King County Courthouse and others
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.
