Cases 1 - 10 of 67
Dawson v. Sargus et al
as 2:2024cv02175
Plaintiff:
William T. Dawson, Jr.
Defendant:
Judge Edmund A Sargus, Jr, Christin Werner, Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Nelson v. Lorain Correctional Institution et al
as 1:2023cv00379
Plaintiff:
David A. Nelson
Defendant:
Lorain Correctional Institution and Southern Ohio Correctional Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Richland County Jail et al
as 1:2022cv00910
Plaintiff:
Robert W. Johnson
Defendant:
Richland County Jail, Christopher Blunk, James Myers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Lucey et al
as 1:2022cv00427
Plaintiff:
Mr. Jacob Smith and Jacob Smith
Defendant:
Mr. David Lucey, Mr. Mark Osborne, Mr. Nelson Laboy and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Nelson v. USA
as 5:2022cv00323
Petitioner:
Donyea Nelson
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Nelson v. USA
as 1:2021cv01687
Petitioner:
Kendal Nelson
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Nelson v. Wiedimen et al
as 2:2021cv01177
Plaintiff:
Anthony Levi Nelson
Defendant:
Steven P. Bethard, Matthew T. Wiedimen and Darci Moore
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nelson v. Cuyahoga County et al
as 1:2020cv02783
Defendant:
Gregory Croucher, Eric Ivey, Armond Budish and others
Plaintiff:
Gregory Nelson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nelson v. Ohio Parole Board et al
as 1:2020cv02743
Respondent:
Warden Keith J. Foley, Annette Chambers-Smith and Ohio Parole Board
Petitioner:
Carl A Nelson, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Nelson v. Ohio Parole Board et al
as 2:2020cv06283
Respondent:
Ohio Parole Board, Director Annette Chambers-Smith and Warden, Grafton Correction Institution
Petitioner:
Carl A. Nelson, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
