Cases 111 - 120 of 246
Guzman v. Corrections Corporation of America et al
as 4:2013cv01205
Plaintiff:
Wilmer A Guzman
Defendant:
Corrections Corporation of America , Michael V. Pugh , Albert Aiad-Toss, M.D. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Gonzalez v. Tibbals
as 1:2013cv00014
Petitioner:
Edgar Gonzalez
Respondent:
Terry A. Tibbals
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wensink v. Lorea, et al
as 1:2012cv02501
Plaintiff:
Michael R. Wensink
Defendant:
Joaquin Guzman Lorea, Ismael Zambada Garcia, Darrell Edward Issa and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Welch et al v. United States et al
as 1:2012cv02238
Plaintiff:
Edward Welch, John Roosevelt Baccus, Patrick Strozier and others
Defendant:
United States of America, Benita Y. Pearson, Thomas J. McAvoy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gonzalez v. Smith
as 3:2012cv01636
Petitioner:
Antonio Gonzalez
Respondent:
Keith Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Gonzalez v. Farley
as 4:2012cv01481
Petitioner:
Juan Banuelos Gonzalez
Respondent:
Robert Farley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Gonzalez v. Rushing
as 4:2012cv01274
Respondent:
Roddie Rushing
Petitioner:
Teodoro J. Gonzalez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Ruiz et al v. Pugh et al
as 4:2012cv01043
Plaintiff:
Carlos Manuel Ruiz, Carlos Garcia, Miguel Feliz and others
Defendant:
Michael Pugh, Correctional Corporation of America and Northeast Ohio Correctional Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gonzalez v. Rushing
as 4:2012cv00212
Petitioner:
Teodoro J. Gonzalez
Respondent:
Roddie Rushing
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Thomas v. Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority et al
as 1:2011cv02727
Plaintiff:
Hazel Thomas
Defendant:
Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority , Andres Gonzalez and Brandon Hizak
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
