Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Nichols v. People
as 1:2022cv03364
Petitioner:
Rickie T. Nichols
Respondent:
People
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jordon v. Ebbert et al
as 4:2019cv01472
Defendant:
Mr. Watson, K. Sorce, D. Andrew Edringer and others
Plaintiff:
Bralen L. Jordon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
HARRELL v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 3:2018cv11299
Defendant:
CITY OF LONG BRANCH, JOHN T NICHOLS, NEW JERSEY DEPT. OF LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY and others
Plaintiff:
DION HARRELL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harden et al v. NDOC HDSP Deputy Director et al
as 2:2017cv01826
Defendant:
Associate Warden, Classification Specialist, Deputy warden and others
Plaintiff:
Harold D Harden, Mark Johnas Jr, Calvin Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BLOCKUM EL v. WHITE et al
as 5:2017cv00093
Plaintiff:
VICTOR L BLOCKUM EL
Defendant:
D PARKS WHITE, MIKE SMITH, THOMAS L HODGES, III and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
EVANS v. NICHOLS
as 5:2015cv00046
Plaintiff:
SAM EVANS
Defendant:
T NICHOLS and S WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nichols v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
as 2:2010cv01158
Petitioner:
John T Nichols
Respondent:
Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Nichols v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
as 1:2010cv00944
Petitioner:
John T Nichols
Respondent:
Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CLOUD et al v. NICHOLS et al
as 2:2010cv00139
Defendant:
A. BALLARD, CLINGERMAN, T. NICHOLS and others
Plaintiff:
THOMAS CLOUD and DAVID A. METZGER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mata v. Nichols et al
as 6:2007cv00374
Plaintiff:
Carlos Mata
Defendant:
T. Nichols, G. L. Stephenson and Kelli Ward
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.
