Cases 1 - 10 of 45
Davis v. Payne
as 5:2024cv03074
Petitioner:
Matthew Evan Davis, Sr.
Respondent:
Kevin Payne
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
White (ID 76983) v. Parks et al
as 5:2024cv03023
Plaintiff:
Bobby Bruce White
Defendant:
Andrew Parks, Evan Meredith, Bruce Chapman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Price v. Hardy et al
as 5:2023cv03058
Plaintiff:
John Timothy Price
Defendant:
D. Hardy, V. Evans and C. Steinback
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Miller v. Evans
as 5:2022cv03269
Petitioner:
Garrett Miller
Respondent:
Rice County, Kansas and Bryant Evans
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Elson v. Evans
as 5:2022cv03266
Petitioner:
Michael Elson
Respondent:
Rice County Jail and Bryant Evans
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Evans v. Kansas, State of
as 5:2022cv03147
Petitioner:
Zabriel Leon Evans
Respondent:
Kansas, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wicks v. Winger et al
as 5:2022cv03107
Plaintiff:
Bradley A. Wicks
Defendant:
Angela Tolbosh Winger, Tim Weaver, Bryant Evans and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barlett v. Evans et al
as 5:2022cv03079
Plaintiff:
Teek Aram Barlett
Defendant:
Bryant Evans, Tim Weaver and Marci Heath
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Robinson (ID 85893) v. Sedgwick County Jail et al
as 5:2022cv03047
Plaintiff:
Robert L. Robinson
Defendant:
Sedgwick County Jail, Jeff Easter, Evan Carpenter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Campbell v. Hitchcock et al
as 2:2021cv02141
Defendant:
Aramark Food Services, Evan Hitchcock, Kansas Department of Corrections and others
Plaintiff:
Matthew Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 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.
