Cases 1 - 10 of 37
Hager et al v. Jividen et al
as 5:2024cv00258
Plaintiff:
Douglas Hager and Adam Lee Suratt
Defendant:
Betsy Jividen, Michael Francis, Tiffany Ford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nelson v. Shrewsbury et al
as 2:2023cv00543
Plaintiff:
Nathan Nelson
Defendant:
Aaron Shrewsbury and City of Mount Hope
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mott v. Doe et al
as 3:2023cv00156
Plaintiff:
Nathan Mott
Defendant:
Warden John Doe, Assistant Warden John Doe, Mr. Blanks and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Mott v. Doe et al
as 3:2023cv00131
Plaintiff:
Mr. Nathan Mott and Carl Lynch
Defendant:
John Doe, Mr. Blanks, Knotts and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Mott v. Doe et al
as 3:2023cv00127
Plaintiff:
Mr. Nathan Mott and Carl Lynch
Defendant:
Warden John Doe, Assistant Warden John Doe, Mr. Blanks and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Daniels v. Brown
as 5:2023cv00162
Petitioner:
Nathan Daniels
Respondent:
Warden Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Smith v. Weaver
as 3:2023cv00111
Plaintiff:
Nathan Wayne Smith
Defendant:
RN Weaver
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Hensley v. Brown
as 3:2022cv00178
Petitioner:
Robert Nathan Hensley
Respondent:
S. Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Akers v. Simpkins
as 3:2022cv00147
Petitioner:
Montgomery Carl Akers
Respondent:
Nathan Simpkins
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Akers v. Simmons et al
as 3:2022cv00148
Plaintiff:
Montgomery Carl Akers
Defendant:
Jason Simmons, Jamie Conover, Kathy S. Hill and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
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.
