Cases 81 - 90 of 94
STEVENS v. SCHULTZ et al
as 1:2007cv03502
Petitioner:
RODNEY STEVENS
Respondent:
PAUL SCHULTZ and UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
ADAMS v. SCHULTZ et al
as 1:2007cv01315
Petitioner:
TIMOTHY ADAMS
Respondent:
PAUL SCHULTZ and HARLEY G. LAPPIN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
DELGADO v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2007cv03361
Petitioner:
BRANDON DELGADO
Respondent:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and PAUL SCHULTZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
ESCRIBANO v. SCHULTZ
as 1:2007cv03204
Petitioner:
DANIEL REYES ESCRIBANO
Respondent:
PAUL SCHULTZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
GUIDICE v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION et al
as 1:2007cv03055
Petitioner:
FRANK GUIDICE
Respondent:
UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, PAUL SCHULTZ and ALBERTO GONZALEZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
NUCKOLS v. SCHULTZ
as 1:2007cv02319
Petitioner:
HARRY T. NUCKOLS
Respondent:
PAUL SCHULTZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
BLAKNEY v. SCHULTZ
as 1:2007cv01946
Petitioner:
JAMES BLAKNEY
Respondent:
PAUL SCHULTZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
FLOWERS v. SCHULTZ et al
as 1:2007cv02035
Plaintiff:
ALFRED FLOWERS
Defendant:
PAUL SCHULTZ, LINDA SANDERS and BRIAN PATTON
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
RACINE v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 1:2007cv01834
Petitioner:
DANA RACINE
Respondent:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and PAUL SCHULTZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
ABDUR-RAHIIM v. SCHULTZ
as 1:2007cv01339
Petitioner:
MUHSIN HANIF ABDUR-RAHIIM
Respondent:
PAUL SCHULTZ
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
