Cases 21 - 30 of 48
Peach v. Joslin
as 2:2010cv00027
Petitioner:
Michael C Peach
Respondent:
Dan Joslin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Peach v. Joslin
as 2:2010cv00020
Petitioner:
Michael C Peach
Respondent:
Dan Joslin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Avila v. Lappin et al
as 4:2010cv00136
Plaintiff:
Primitivo Avila
Defendant:
Harvey G Lappin, Michael Mukasey, Dan Joslin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Joslin
as 2:2009cv00344
Petitioner:
Roy Lee Jones
Respondent:
Dan Joslin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Lester Ruston v. USA, et al
as 09-11123
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LESTER JON RUSTON
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PAUL BROWN, Judicial Officer Eastern District Federal Court, DON BUSH, Judicial Officer Eastern Distict Federal Court and others
Hill v. Joslin
as 2:2009cv00293
Petitioner:
Demery Hill
Respondent:
Dan Joslin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Avila v. Lappin et al
as 4:2009cv02414
Plaintiff:
Primitivo Avila
Defendant:
Harvey G Lappin, Michael Mukasey, Dan Joslin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, Federal Filers (Bivens)
Dockery v. U S Department Of Justice et al
as 2:2009cv00225
Plaintiff:
Barry C Dockery
Defendant:
U S Department Of Justice, Dan Joslin, Ms Rivers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Gordon et al
as 1:2009cv00386
Plaintiff:
Quentin Antwan Mitchell
Defendant:
T. Gordon, L. Weston, M. Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Gordon et al
as 5:2009cv00063
Plaintiff:
Quentin Antwan Mitchell
Defendant:
T. Gordon, L. Weston, M. Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Civil Rights Violation
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.
