Cases 1 - 10 of 40
Lynch v. Doe
as 3:2022cv00691
Plaintiff:
Leroy Lynch
Defendant:
John Doe
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lynch v. State of Mississippi
as 4:2022cv00181
Petitioner:
Leroy Lynch
Respondent:
State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ORTIZ-LOPEZ et al v. DIRECTOR OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 5:2018cv00076
Plaintiff:
ELDER NEHEMIAS LOPEZ-HERNANDEZ, JOSE MARIA BARRIOS-IPUANA, JHAIR GENEROSO PATERNINA-CHRISTOPHER and others
Defendant:
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, LORETTA E. LYNCH and DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodriguez v. Lynch et al
as 5:2017cv00013
Plaintiff:
Justo Pastor Rodriguez Rodriguez
Defendant:
Loretta Lynch, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Dave Berkebile and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Ramos v. Lynch et al
as 5:2016cv00128
Plaintiff:
Eddy Alberto-Deleon Ramos
Defendant:
Loretta Lynch, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Dave Berkebile and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Alfaro v. Lynch et al
as 5:2016cv00127
Plaintiff:
Luis Antonio Alfaro
Defendant:
Loretta Lynch, Charles E. Samuels, Jr. and Dave Berkebile
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Beverly v. Shults et al
as 3:2016cv00960
Plaintiff:
Charles Jarrod Beverly
Defendant:
L. Shults and L. Lynch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Rushing v. Shults et al
as 3:2016cv00957
Plaintiff:
LaShawn Rushing
Defendant:
L. Shults and L. Lynch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
McClain v. Shults et al
as 3:2016cv00956
Plaintiff:
Reginald McClain
Defendant:
L. Shults and L. Lynch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Delaine v. Shults et al
as 3:2016cv00938
Petitioner:
Steven Delaine
Respondent:
L. Shults and L. Lynch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
