Cases 1 - 10 of 96
ROMAN v. QUINLAN et al
as 1:2024cv05267
Plaintiff:
MIGUEL A. ROMAN
Defendant:
J. QUINLAN, HICKOCK, S. PRINCE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Justin Quinlan v. Peter Bludworth, et al
as 23-35274
Petitioner / Appellant:
JUSTIN ALAN QUINLAN
Respondent / Appellee:
PETER BLUDWORTH and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MONTANA
Mann v. Montgomery
as 23-30232
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Original Mann, formerly known as Cyrus Casby
Defendant / Appellee:
Ann Montgomery, DNA Analyst, Bonnie Dubourg, DNA Analyst, Greg Harrell, DNA Analyst and others
Terrance Quinlan v. John Conaty, et al
as 23-35071
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TERRANCE JOE QUINLAN
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN CONATY, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and DOUG WHITLEY, Kent Police Dept
Quinlan v. King County et al
as 2:2022cv01718
Plaintiff:
Terrance Joe Quinlan
Defendant:
King County, King County Sheriff's Office, Deputy Keith Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Quinlan v. Ferguson
as 2:2022cv01709
Petitioner:
Terrance Joe Quinlan
Respondent:
Robert W Ferguson and Rob Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Quinlan v. County of King et al
as 4:2022cv05152
Plaintiff:
Terrance Joe Quinlan
Defendant:
County of King, King County Sheriff Office, Keith Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Quinlan v. Ferguson
as 4:2022cv05143
Petitioner:
Terrance Joe Quinlan
Respondent:
Robert W Ferguson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Quinlan v. King County
as 2:2022cv00902
Defendant:
County of King and King County
Plaintiff:
Terrance Joe Quinlan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Terrance Quinlan v. Department of Corrections
as 22-35487
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TERRANCE JOE QUINLAN
Defendant / Appellee:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
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.
