Cases 71 - 80 of 30,459
MORRIS v. N.C. DEPARTMENT OF ADULT CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2024cv00395
Respondent:
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF ADULT CORRECTIONS, N.C. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY and MARY LOCKLEAR
Petitioner:
MATTHEW MORRIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024hc02062
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 4241 Motion to Determine Mental Competency/Other Dist.
WRIGHT v. RANSOM et al
as 1:2024cv00382
Plaintiff:
KAYIE SHAUNE DEVORE WRIGHT
Defendant:
GENO RANSOM, FNU POTRELLA, FNU L. BULLARD and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CARANZA v. PYLES et al
as 1:2024cv00208
Plaintiff:
JOSE M. CARANZA
Defendant:
OFFICER PYLES, OFFICER SHAFFER, WARDEN DAVID CASSIDY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fleming v. Lee et al
as 3:2024cv00457
Plaintiff:
Carl L. Fleming
Defendant:
Talena Lee, Anthony J. Mincey, FNU Olson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Ishee
as 1:2024cv00138
Petitioner:
Rodney Moucell Jones
Respondent:
Todd E. Ishee
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CARTLIDGE v. USA
as 1:2024cv00381
Petitioner:
JOSEPH MARSELL CARTLIDGE
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00463
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Interested Party:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Coram Nobis
DeLeon v. Unknown Defendant
as 5:2024ct03107
Plaintiff:
Abel DeLeon
Defendant:
Unknown Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Cobbs v. Harrell et al
as 5:2024ct03106
Plaintiff:
Rodney Elroy Cobbs
Defendant:
Richard K. Harrell and Ricardo Jensen
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.
