Cases 101 - 110 of 169
SAPP v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS DIVISION OF PRISONS
as 1:2011cv00181
Petitioner:
DONALD LEE SAPP, JR.
Respondent:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS DIVISION OF PRISONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Bauberger v. Haynes et al
as 5:2011ct03032
Plaintiff:
William Bauberger
Defendant:
Grady Haynes, Arthur Davis, Sampson Harrell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tompkins v. Department of Correction et al
as 5:2010ct03224
Plaintiff:
Stuart Wayne Tompkins
Defendant:
Department of Correction, J.N. Vaughan, Officer Hunt and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
OWENS-BEY v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA et al
as 1:2010cv00952
Petitioner:
DAMON OWENS-BEY
Respondent:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION and CASWELL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Johnson v. NC Department of Corrections
as 5:2010cv00192
Petitioner:
Steven Glenn Johnson
Respondent:
NC Department of Corrections
Defendant:
Phillip Redmond
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Stevens v. North Carolina Department of Correction
as 5:2010mc00062
Plaintiff:
Camello Recardo Stevens
Defendant:
North Carolina Department of Correction
SMITH v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION ENTERPRISE
as 1:2010cv00835
Plaintiff:
BILLY HARRIS SMITH
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION ENTERPRISE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daniels v. North Carolina Department of Correction et al
as 5:2010ct03197
Plaintiff:
Kristopher Daniels
Defendant:
North Carolina Department of Correction and Brunswick County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
POWELL v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
as 1:2010cv00793
Petitioner:
JAMES POWELL
Respondent:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ALVIN KELLER and SANDRA THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
HOLCOMB v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
as 1:2010cv00791
Respondent:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ALVIN KELLER and BUTCH JACKSON
Petitioner:
BARRY HOLCOMB
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
