Cases 11 - 20 of 3,910
Warfield v. Morgan et al
as 1:2024cv00375
Defendant:
Fort Wayne Community School, Lisa Fowlkes, Patrice Coleman and others
Plaintiff:
Ieasha R. Warfield
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gomez v. Yazoo City USP
as 3:2024cv00430
Respondent:
Yazoo City USP
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Petitioner:
Alberto Gomez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Precious Shawnell Evans v. United States Postal Service et al
as 2:2024cv07720
Plaintiff:
Precious Shawnell Evans
Defendant:
USPS, An Agency of the United States Government
Cause Of Action: 23 U.S.C. § 134 P.I.- Auto Negligence
Jacques, Patrick v. Lee USP
as 1:2024cv23496
Plaintiff:
Patrick Jacques
Defendant:
Lee USP
Cause Of Action: Bivens - Federal Prisoner Civil Rights
Mohamed v. Warden, USPO Hazelton
as 5:2024cv00138
Respondent:
Warden, USP Hazelton
Petitioner:
Guled Mohamed
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Darrell Parks v. Warden, FCC Coleman - USP I
as 24-12227
Respondent:
WARDEN, FCC COLEMAN - USP I
Petitioner:
DARRELL JAMES PARKS
Chrustowski v. DeJoy
as 24-2075
Defendant:
USPS HEADQUARTERS, GIANT FOODS and LOUIS DEJOY, Postmaster General and Chief Executive Officer
Plaintiff:
RENEE ANNETTE CHRUSTOWSKI
MERIDA et al v. DEJOY, in his official capacity as Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service et al
as 2:2024cv07342
Defendant:
United States Postal Services aka USPS, Joe Cao and LOUIS DEJOY, in his official capacity as Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service
Plaintiff:
LISBETH GARCIA, OLIVIA VALLE GOMEZ and DONALDO G ARCIA MERIDA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Auto Negligence
Minor v. USP Big Sandy
as 7:2024cv00048
Respondent:
USP Big Sandy
Petitioner:
Herman Minor
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
