Cases 1 - 10 of 25
Carlton v. Weber et al
as 1:2024cv00514
Plaintiff:
David L. Carlton
Defendant:
Shane Weber, Bradley Butler, Corizon Health Services and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Shiheed v. Smith et al
as 1:2022cv00720
Plaintiff:
Yahyi Abdul Shiheed and Yalmi Shiheed
Defendant:
J. Smith, j. Bennett, D. Hedrick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Fleming v. Weber et al
as 1:2022cv00581
Plaintiff:
Christopher B. Fleming, Sr.
Defendant:
Warden Shane Weber, Corizon Health, Inc., Janette Clark, N.P. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Doory et al
as 1:2022cv00588
Petitioner:
Thomas Isiah Davis
Respondent:
Timothy J. Doory, Steven Crowley, Thomas Ports and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Stewart v. United States Marshals Service et al
as 1:2021cv02763
Plaintiff:
Charles B. Stewart and Charles B. Stewart-Bey
Defendant:
United States Marshals Service, Quincy L. Booth and Lennard Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Hammock v. Director/Warden Gail Watts et al
as 1:2021cv02467
Petitioner:
Terrence Edward Hammock
Respondent:
Director/Warden Gail Watts and Honorable Judge Ms. Elisebeth Boothe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Schiff v. Booth et al
as 8:2020cv00902
Defendant:
David Booth, Katherine Getty and County Executive Marc Elrich
Plaintiff:
Graham Harry Schiff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Aurel v. Steininger et al
as 1:2019cv02743
Defendant:
Sgt. Uphold, Lt. Syrtes, Haggard and others
Plaintiff:
Mich Aurel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Booth v. Warden et al
as 1:2019cv01046
Defendant:
Warden
Plaintiff:
Davonya Booth
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Jones et al v. Booth et al
as 1:2017cv03135
Plaintiff:
Michael A Jones and Derek Jones
Defendant:
Ms. Booth, Ms. Emma Prett, Mr. Haggerd and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
