Cases 1 - 10 of 215
WILLIAMS v. TAT et al
as 1:2023cv00286
Plaintiff:
PERCIVAL WILLIAMS
Defendant:
SARA TAT, STATE OF FLORIDA, WILLIAM E DAVIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
W.Scott Davis v. Katina Heckard
as 23-7103
Petitioner / Appellant:
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, II
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN KATINA HECKARD
DAVIS v. USA
as 1:2023cv00604
Petitioner:
WILLIAM ROY DAVIS
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
William Davis, Jr. v. Jared Rardin, et al
as 23-2467
Petitioner / Appellant:
William Scott Davis, Jr.
Respondent / Appellee:
Jared Rardin, Warden FMC Rochester, Collette Peters, F.B.O.P. Director and Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General of the United States
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00283
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00282
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
William Davis, Jr. v. Jared Rardin, et al
as 23-2445
Petitioner / Appellant:
William Scott Davis, Jr.
Respondent / Appellee:
Jared Rardin, Warden F.M.C. Rochester MN, Merrick B. Garland, U.S.A.G. and Collette Peters, Director F.B.O.P.
Davis v. United States of America
as 5:2023cv00433
Petitioner:
William Scott Davis, Jr.
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Davis v. Rardin
as 0:2023cv01675
Petitioner:
William Scott Davis, Jr.
Respondent:
Jared Rardin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
William Davis, Jr. v. Jared Rardin, et al
as 23-2315
Petitioner / Appellant:
William Scott Davis, Jr.
Respondent / Appellee:
Jared Rardin, Warden FMC Rochester, Collette Peters, F.B.O.P. Director and Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General of the United States
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.
