Cases 51 - 60 of 109
GARZA v. MARTINEZ et al
as 1:2015cv01744
Petitioner:
GUADALUPE GARZA, JR.
Respondent:
MARTINEZ, BEMENT and UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
DAVIS v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
as 1:2015cv01670
Plaintiff:
EUGENE DAVIS
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS, DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
EVANS v. U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE
as 1:2015cv01612
Petitioner:
WILLIAM H. EVANS, JR.
Respondent:
U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
BURKE v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS et al
as 1:2015cv01151
Plaintiff:
ROBERT BURKE
Defendant:
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
MARSHAL v. USA
as 1:2015cv01116
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
JONATHAN MARSHALL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
JOHNSON v. CITY OF DALLAS/TX et al
as 1:2015cv00884
Plaintiff:
DIETRICK L JOHNSON, SR.
Defendant:
CITY OF DALLAS/TX, DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, DALLAS POLICE IMPOUND and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00206
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
EVANS v. UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE et al
as 1:2014cv01818
Petitioner:
WILLIAMS H. EVANS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE and WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv01466
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TAYLOR v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2014cv01223
Plaintiff:
STACY ALLEN TAYLOR
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
