Cases 51 - 60 of 236
DOUGLAS v. WARDEN
as 3:2022cv00123
Petitioner:
BIATHA DOUGLAS
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Woods v. Neal et al
as 3:2022cv00605
Plaintiff:
Donald Woods
Defendant:
Ron Neal, Douglas Wardlow and Frazier
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MICKLES et al v. HARRIS et al
as 2:2022cv00270
Plaintiff:
TERRELL MICKLES, NGHIA PARKER, PATRICE POWELL and others
Defendant:
TERRI HARRIS, CORDOVA, GALLERIA MALL CORP. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
BUCK v. SCHATZ
as 2:2022cv00239
Plaintiff:
DOUGLAS BUCK
Defendant:
MORGAN SCHATZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FULK v. GLASSBURN et al
as 2:2022cv00207
Plaintiff:
DOUGLAS M. FULK
Defendant:
JASE GLASSBURN and PAUL B. HARDEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Murphy v. Lock et al
as 1:2022cv00137
Plaintiff:
Zachary Steven Murphy
Defendant:
Cassandra Lock, Brandon Rittenhouse, Jennifer Patrick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Newgent v. Kokomo IN Police Department et al
as 4:2022cv00026
Plaintiff:
Steven Douglas Newgent
Defendant:
Kokomo IN Police Department and Travis Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GUILMETTE v. CENTURION et al
as 2:2022cv00100
Plaintiff:
DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE
Defendant:
CENTURION, SAMUEL BYRD and BOBBY RIGGS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shelly v. Alexa et al
as 2:2022cv00045
Plaintiff:
Marzono Shelly
Defendant:
William Alexa, James Howard Douglas and Jeffrey Clymer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GARRETT v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
as 2:2022cv00076
Plaintiff:
Howard Garrett
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Executive Director RICHARD BROWN, FRANK VANIHEL 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.
