Cases 51 - 60 of 121
Morales v. Clarke
as 1:2010cv10013
Petitioner:
Porforio Morales
Respondent:
Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lodge v. Clarke
as 1:2009cv12026
Petitioner:
Michael Lodge, Sr
Respondent:
Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Schofield v. Clarke
as 4:2009cv40204
Plaintiff:
Eugene Schofield
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ford et al v. Clarke et al
as 1:2009cv11919
Plaintiff:
Albert Ford and Jorge Jimenez
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Peter St. Amand, John Brodbeck and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LeBaron v. Hicks et al
as 1:2009cv11904
Plaintiff:
Nathan Marquis LeBaron
Defendant:
Tom Hicks, Marlene Dodge, Aysha Hameed and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hernandez v. Clarke et al
as 1:2009cv11733
Plaintiff:
Axel Hernandez
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke and Steven J. O'Brien
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Martin v. Clarke et al
as 1:2009cv11712
Plaintiff:
Willilam J. Martin
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Umass Correctional Medical Program and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Criswell v. Cousins et al
as 1:2009cv11630
Plaintiff:
Kharee Criswell
Defendant:
Frank Cousins, Jr., Harold W. Clarke and E.C.C.F. Staff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stroman v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al
as 1:2009cv11542
Plaintiff:
Evans E. Stroman
Defendant:
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Massachusetts Department of Corrections, Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv11533
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
