Cases 71 - 80 of 81
Vickrey v. Idaho, State of et al
as 3:2007cv00483
Plaintiff:
Mark Vickrey
Defendant:
Idaho, State of, John Erbst, Kim Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Ysursa
as 1:2007cv00388
Plaintiff:
Frank C Jones
Defendant:
Ben Ysursa
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Reineke et al
as 1:2007cv00382
Plaintiff:
Dustin R. Jones
Defendant:
Brent Reineke, Mike Richman and Jerri Burchett Taylor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Montoya v. Jones
as 3:2007cv00379
Petitioner:
Carlos Montoya
Respondent:
Kim Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Jones v. Idaho, State of et al
as 3:2007cv00304
Petitioner:
Raven Jones
Respondent:
Idaho, State of, IDOC and Kim Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Skanda v. Reinke et al
as 1:2007cv00271
Plaintiff:
SankaraNandi S Skanda
Defendant:
Brent Reinke, Vaughn Killeen, Thomas Beauclair and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv00261
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Murphy v. Idaho, State of et al
as 3:2007cv00230
Petitioner:
Michael David Murphy
Respondent:
Idaho, State of, Director of IDOC and Kim Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Muraco v. Jones et al
as 3:2007cv00144
Petitioner:
William L Muraco
Respondent:
Kim Jones, Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole and Idaho Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Skanda v. Jones et al
as 3:2006cv00501
Plaintiff:
SankaraNandi Soma EkstasisAmrta Skanda
Defendant:
Kimberly Jones, Kevin Kempf, Dennis Polk 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.
