Cases 11 - 20 of 89
NEWKIRK v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2022cv00201
Petitioner:
RASHEEN NEWKIRK
Respondent:
WARDEN M. UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
MCCORMACK v. UNDERWOOD et al
as 3:2022cv00176
Petitioner:
BEN MCCORMACK
Respondent:
M. UNDERWOOD and F.C.I. LORETTO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
GOBERN v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2022cv00167
Petitioner:
ALEXIO GOBERN
Respondent:
WARDEN M. UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Pendarvis v. Wilson et al
as 2:2022cv03142
Plaintiff:
John Trenton Pendarvis
Defendant:
Alan M. Wilson, Mark A. Keel, Hugh E. Weathers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
UNDERWOOD v 3M COMPANY et al
as 3:2022cv16889
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN M. UNDERWOOD
Defendant:
3M COMPANY and AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ADEYEMI v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2022cv00134
Petitioner:
AKINTUNDE ADEYEMI
Defendant:
WARDEN M. UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
COFFELT v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2022cv00129
Petitioner:
PHILLIP W. COFFELT
Respondent:
WARDEN UNDERWOOD and WARDEN M. UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
CORNISH v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2022cv00122
Petitioner:
KOREY KASCHIEF CORNISH
Respondent:
WARDEN M. UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Underwood v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2022cv01947
Plaintiff:
Johnathan M. Underwood and Jonathan M. Underwood
Defendant:
3M Company and Aearo Technologies LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
UNDERWOOD v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv10729
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
LENNOX M UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
