Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Armstrong v. Divris
as 4:2024cv40084
Petitioner:
Glenn R. Armstrong
Respondent:
Superintendent Matthew J. Divris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Armstrong v. State of Iowa
as 4:2020cv00037
Respondent:
State of Iowa
Interested Party:
Kevin Cmelik
Petitioner:
Jonathan R. Armstrong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Armstrong et al v. Iowa Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2019cv00271
Defendant:
Rory Ingwerson, Jerry Bartruff, Chris Tripp and others
Plaintiff:
Terence Slater, Jonathan R. Armstrong and Devontae Hearn
Interested Party:
William A Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Armstrong v. Gibbs
as 4:2019cv00224
Respondent:
Randy Gibbs
Petitioner:
Jonathan R. Armstrong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Armstrong v. Warden, Ross Correctional Institution
as 1:2015cv00783
Petitioner:
Britton R. Armstrong
Respondent:
Warden, Ross Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Oliver v. Gore et al
as 2:2015cv00345
Defendant:
R. Gore , J Bond , J. Whittaker and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony Wayne Oliver
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Armstrong v. Russell et al
as 1:2014cv00036
Plaintiff:
Claudale R. Armstrong
Defendant:
Lee Russell and State of Tennessee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Oliver v. Johnson et al
as 1:2011cv00520
Plaintiff:
Michael Darnell Oliver
Defendant:
Johnny L. Johnson, C. Kimbrel, Sgt. Bailey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Oliver v. Johnson et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2011cv00601
Plaintiff:
Michael Darnell Oliver
Defendant:
Johnny L. Johnson, C. Kimbrel, Sgt. Bailey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ocasio v. Deluke
as 11-1112
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Omar Ocasio
Defendant - Appellee:
F. Deluke, C.O., Great Meadow Correctional Facility, P. Vanguilder, Deputy of Security, Great Meadow Correctional Facility, Richard Roy, Inspector General and others
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.
