Cases 1 - 10 of 467
SHELLY v. VANIHEL
as 2:2024cv00187
Plaintiff:
MARZONO SHELLY
Defendant:
FRANK VANIHEL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BLUE v. INDIANA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2024cv00181
Plaintiff:
JEREMY BLUE
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, FRANK VANIHEL, DENNIS REGGLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lake v. State of Indiana et al
as 2:2024cv00168
Plaintiff:
Logan Bradley Lake
Defendant:
Indiana State of, Benjamin Lopez, Richard D Rivera and others
Not Yet Classified:
Service List
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PEACHER v. VANIHEL
as 2:2024cv00172
Petitioner:
ROBERT PEACHER
Respondent:
FRANK VANIHEL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
KANABLE v. ALLEN et al
as 1:2024cv00771
Plaintiff:
KRIS KANABLE
Defendant:
TRENT ALLEN, HIATT, D. THOMSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GABALDON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2024cv00767
Plaintiff:
FRANK GABALDON
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2674 Federal Tort Claims Act
BLUE v. ELKINS et al
as 2:2024cv00166
Plaintiff:
JEREMY BLUE
Defendant:
CRYSTAL ELKINS, MIAIAH J. POTWYN, MARK D. SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LEWIS v. BEDWELL et al
as 2:2024cv00162
Plaintiff:
TIYO LEWIS
Defendant:
BEDWELL, AIRMARK and FRANK VANIHEL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ORR v. ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES et al
as 2:2024cv00161
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ORR
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, BUTLER, FRANK VANIHEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JACKSON v. I.D.O.C. et al
as 2:2024cv00150
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM CLAYTON JACKSON
Defendant:
I.D.O.C., FRANK VANIHEL and WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
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.
