Cases 1 - 10 of 1,044
Milcendeau v. Stange
as 1:2024cv00108
Petitioner:
David James Milcendeau
Respondent:
Bill Stange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wade v. Hamm
as 4:2024cv00803
Plaintiff:
Tyson James Wade
Defendant:
Officer Unknown Hamm
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Milcendeau v. Stange
as 4:2024cv00378
Petitioner:
David James Milcendeau
Respondent:
Bill Stange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jordan v. Watson et al
as 4:2024cv00734
Plaintiff:
Andrew James Jordan, Sr.
Defendant:
Det. Unknown Watson, Arnold Police Dept. and Jefferson County Police Dept.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mann v. Loveday et al
as 6:2024cv03130
Plaintiff:
James Mann
Defendant:
Loveday, Missouri Department of Corrections, Duryea and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Leist v. Griffin et al
as 4:2024cv00578
Plaintiff:
Zachery Leist
Defendant:
Tyler Griffin, C. James and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Beil v. Fischer et al
as 4:2024cv00275
Plaintiff:
James Beil
Defendant:
Jo Leigh Fischer and Lynn M Stoppy
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nutall v. Page
as 4:2024cv00243
Petitioner:
Willie James Nutall
Respondent:
Justine Page
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Shattuck-Knaebel v. Missouri Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2024cv00454
Defendant:
Unknown Nichols, Missouri Department of Corrections, Bed Broker at Fulton Reception Diagnostic Center (2015) and others
Plaintiff:
Charles D. Shattuck-Knaebel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McElroy v. Beadles et al
as 6:2024cv03062
Plaintiff:
Raymond Glenn McElroy
Defendant:
Jonah Beadles and James Arnott
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.
