Cases 151 - 160 of 5,652
Smith v. Eischen
as 0:2023cv02866
Petitioner:
Darrell D. Smith
Respondent:
B. Eischen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Arnold v. Brott
as 0:2023cv02805
Petitioner:
Eugene Nathaniel Arnold, III
Respondent:
Joel Brott
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Arnold v. Witt
as 0:2023cv02806
Petitioner:
Eugene Nathaniel Arnold, III
Respondent:
Sheriff Dawanna Witt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Martinez v. Eischen
as 0:2023cv03178
Petitioner:
Francisco Martinez
Respondent:
Warden B. Eischen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
McIntosh v. Peters et al
as 0:2023cv03150
Plaintiff:
Patrick Randell McIntosh
Defendant:
Collette S Peters, Central Office Religious Director for the Federal Bureau of Prisons and Central Office Director of Trust Fund
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Young v. Eischen
as 0:2023cv03227
Petitioner:
Howard Young
Respondent:
Warden B. Eischen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Holmes v. Centurion of Minnesota et al
as 0:2023cv02971
Plaintiff:
Stephan Nicholas Holmes
Defendant:
Centurion of Minnesota, MN DOC, State of MN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tizoc v. Rardin
as 0:2023cv02819
Petitioner:
Jose Luis Tizoc
Respondent:
Jared Rardin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
McReynolds v. Witt
as 0:2023cv02712
Petitioner:
Hajji Y. McReynolds
Respondent:
Sheriff Dawanna S. Witt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McReynolds v. Witt
as 0:2023cv02708
Petitioner:
Hajji Y. McReynolds
Respondent:
Sheriff Dawanna S. Witt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
