Cases 81 - 90 of 108
COTTMAN v. ZATECKY et al
as 1:2013cv01793
Defendant:
JEFF BALLENGER, DENNIS DAVIS, THOMAS RICHARDSON and others
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH COTTMAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RICHARDSON v. KNIGHT
as 1:2013cv01658
Respondent:
WENDY KNIGHT
Petitioner:
MARCUS RICHARDSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
RICHARDSON v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 1:2013cv01541
Petitioner:
MARCUS RICHARDSON
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Richardson v. Superintendent
as 3:2013cv01011
Petitioner:
Marcus Richardson
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
RICHARDSON v. KNIGHT et al
as 1:2013cv01470
Defendant:
PAT GIBSON, WENDY KNIGHT and LARRY TAYLOR
Plaintiff:
MARCUS RICHARDSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HENDERSON v. LOTT et al
as 1:2012cv01837
Defendant:
D. ARMSTRONG, CITY OF ANDERSON, M. DULWORTH and others
Plaintiff:
DERYL R. HENDERSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Diaz v. Peru City Police Department et al
as 1:2012cv00290
Plaintiff:
Angel L Diaz
Defendant:
Peru City Police Department, Michael J Vinopal, Officer Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Furlong v. Richardson et al
as 2:2012cv00174
Plaintiff:
Edward A Furlong
Defendant:
Richardson, Williams, Brian Stack and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHARDSON v. WABASH VALLEY FACILITY
as 2:2012cv00013
Petitioner:
MARCUS RICHARDSON
Respondent:
WABASH VALLEY FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MOON et al v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 2:2011cv00221
Defendant:
UNIT MANAGER VICKIE BOYER, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, CHARLES LOCKETT and others
Plaintiff:
DARNELL WESLEY MOON and TONY RICHARDSON
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.
