Cases 161 - 170 of 73,792
Newcomb v. Eischen
as 0:2024cv00876
Petitioner:
Justin Newcomb
Respondent:
B. Eischen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Two Bulls v. Fluke et al
as 4:2024cv04046
Petitioner:
Thomas Earl Two Bulls
Respondent:
Brent Fluke, Marty Jackley and Alex Reyes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wolf Guts v. County et al
as 5:2024cv05015
Plaintiff:
Richard Wolf Guts
Defendant:
Mr. M County, Mr. H Shied, FBCP Phd's and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Smith v. Eischen
as 0:2024cv01551
Petitioner:
Darrell D. Smith
Respondent:
B. Eischen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Alhussein v. Elkhart County
as 0:2024cv01552
Plaintiff:
Musab Mohamed Salih Alhussein
Defendant:
Elkhart County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Trice v. Unknown et al
as 1:2024cv00084
Plaintiff:
Raymond J. Trice
Defendant:
Unknown, Chad Nixon, Matt Greer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Waters v. United States of America
as 5:2024cv05027
Plaintiff:
Garrett Waters
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Babcock v. Reyes et al
as 5:2024cv05026
Petitioner:
Kevin Babcock
Respondent:
Alejandro Reyes and Marty Jackley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Maurice Owen v. United States
as 24-1887
Plaintiff:
Maurice Antonio Owen, also known as Maurice Antonio Parham
Defendant:
United States of America
Marcus Evans v. Lornetta Smith, et al
as 24-1882
Plaintiff:
Marcus D. Evans
Defendant:
Lornetta Smith, Sergeant, Varner Unit, ADC, Telicia Mothershed and Marquis Taylor, Corporal, Verner Unit, ADC (Originally named as "M Taylor")
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.
