Cases 21 - 30 of 44
Clayton Sheldon Creek v. Robert Bob Dooley
as 14-3587
Petitioner:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Respondent:
Robert Bob Dooley
Creek v. Dooley
as 4:2014cv04141
Petitioner:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Respondent:
Robert Dooley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Clayton Creek v. Douglas Weber
as 14-1897
Petitioner:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Respondent:
Warden Douglas Weber
Clayton Sheldon Creek v. Dennis Kaemingk, et al
as 13-3618
Petitioner - Appellant:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Respondent - Appellee:
Dennis Kaemingk, Secretary of Department of Corrections and The Attorney General of the State of South Dakota
Clayton Creek v. United States, et al
as 13-2982
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Defendant - Appellee:
United States of America and South Dakota Department of Corrections
Creek v. Kaemingk et al
as 5:2013cv05065
Petitioner:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Respondent:
Dennis Kaemingk and The Attorney General of the State of South Dakota
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Native American Council, etc., et al v. Douglas Weber, et al
as 13-2745
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Native American Council of Tribes, Blaine Brings Plenty and Clayton Sheldon Creek
Defendant - Appellant:
Douglas Weber, Warden of the South Dakota State Penitentiary and Dennis Kaemingk, Secretary of the Department of Corrections
Native American Council, etc., et al v. Douglas Weber, et al
as 13-1401
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Native American Council of Tribes, Blaine Brings Plenty and Clayton Sheldon Creek
Defendant - Appellant:
Douglas Weber, Warden of the South Dakota State Penitentiary and Dennis Kaemingk, Secretary of the Department of Corrections
Clayton Creek v. United States, et al
as 12-3917
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Defendant - Appellee:
United States of America and South Dakota Department of Corrections
Creek v. Weber
as 4:2012cv04188
Petitioner:
Clayton Sheldon Creek
Respondent:
Douglas L. Weber
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.
