Cases 1 - 10 of 940
MUSGROVE v. ISHEE et al
as 1:2024cv00768
Defendant:
TERRY INGRAM, LACHELLE BULLARD, GARY HUNT and others
Plaintiff:
SAQUAN S. MUSGROVE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ford v. Scarantino
as 5:2024hc02155
Respondent:
Warden T. Scarantino
Petitioner:
Edward E. Ford
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Jefferson v. Boykins et al
as 1:2024cv00219
Defendant:
D.S. Chapman, T.J. Boykins, Joey E. Brandle and others
Plaintiff:
Antonio Dupree Jefferson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Boyle et al
as 5:2024ct03192
Defendant:
Terrence W. Boyle, E. Ray Briggs and Robert Greg Towel
Plaintiff:
David L. Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BREWER v. ISHEE et al
as 1:2024cv00648
Plaintiff:
KENNETH BREWER
Defendant:
C. MCBRIDE, HENRY S. NORDAN, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADULT CORRECTION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harris v. Ishee et al
as 5:2024hc02134
Petitioner:
David Anthony Harris
Respondent:
Warden Michael T. Persons and Todd E. Ishee
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Spates v. Ishee et al
as 5:2024ct03172
Defendant:
Pete Buchholtz and Todd E. Ishee
Plaintiff:
Andre Michael Spates
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FORD v. USA
as 1:2024cv00592
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
EDWARD E. FORD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Hunt v. Global Tel Link Corporation et al
as 5:2024hc02124
Respondent:
ViaPath Technologies, Todd E. Ishee and Global Tellink Corporation
Petitioner:
Michael Eugene Hunt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Lancaster v. Wilson et al
as 5:2024ct03150
Defendant:
Timothy L. Lewis, Bruce Hodges, Ms. Cherry and others
Plaintiff:
Milton E. Lancaster
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.
