Cases 61 - 70 of 580
Hill v. Pelusso et al
as 4:2022cv04318
Plaintiff:
Cymeyon V. Hill
Defendant:
Officer Pelusso, Officer Best, Haciendo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hill v. eHelers et al
as 4:2022cv04315
Plaintiff:
Cymeyon V. Hill
Defendant:
eHelers, Avila, Haciendor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Best v. Trate
as 1:2022cv00821
Petitioner:
Jason Best
Respondent:
B. M. Trate
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Timmy Reichling v. T.J. Fikes, et al
as 22-2366
Petitioner / Appellant:
Timmy J. Reichling
Respondent / Appellee:
T. J. Fikes, Warden, Dr. Ann LaValley-Wood, Chief Psychologist, D. Drillings, Correctional Officer and others
Respondent:
Dr. Warlick, Staff Psychologist, R. Zaudkte, Correctional Officer, T. Scullard, Correctional Officer and others
Joseph Heid v. Forrest Best, et al
as 22-11792
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOSEPH HEID
Defendant / Appellee:
FORREST BEST and MARK RUTKOSKI
Collins v. Fikes et al
as 0:2022cv01320
Plaintiff:
Stephen Collins
Defendant:
Warden J. Fikes, D. Drilling and J. Best
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Best
as 5:2022cv00097
Petitioner:
Michele Best
Respondent:
McCaffrey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Best v. Ezzell et al
as 5:2022ct03122
Plaintiff:
Tellys Best
Defendant:
Sgt. Ezzell, Lt. Roberts and Sgt. Edwards
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Best v. SFF Hazelton
as 5:2022cv00086
Petitioner:
Michele Best
Respondent:
SFF Hazelton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Flowers v. Sehl et al
as 1:2022cv02766
Plaintiff:
Antoine Eddie Flowers
Defendant:
Detective Donald Sehl, Detective Fred Dorch, Detective Albert Gonzalez 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.
