Cases 31 - 40 of 168
O'Neal v. V.A. Director, Department of Corrections
as 2:2019cv00139
Respondent:
V.A. Director, Department of Corrections
Petitioner:
Jackie Lee O'Neal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Kunis v. Allbaugh
as 19-6025
Petitioner / Appellant:
GREGORY S. KUNIS, AKA Darryl G. Toler
Respondent / Appellee:
JOE M. ALLBAUGH, Director, Department of Corrections
Cecil Hall v. Director Department of Correct
as 19-15174
Respondent / Appellee:
DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Petitioner / Appellant:
CECIL LAMAR HALL
Paul Burt v. Eddie Pearson
as 18-6265
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PAUL LEIGH BURT
Defendant - Appellee:
EDDIE PEARSON, Lead Warden, HAROLD CLARKE, Director, Department of Corrections and DAWEN BU, M.D., Neuro Care of Virginia
George B. Hawkins v. Harold Clarke
as 18-6205
Petitioner - Appellant:
GEORGE B. HAWKINS
Respondent - Appellee:
HAROLD CLARKE, Director, Department of Corrections
Marvin Harris v. Vaughn Walker, et al
as 17-17398
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARVIN HARRIS
Defendant - Appellee:
VAUGHN R. WALKER, Administrative Law Judge, USDC Judge, S. COMMANDER, C.O., F. LOGEFEIL, C.O. and others
Marvin Harris, et al v. Charles Marshall, et al
as 17-17372
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARVIN HARRIS
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM HENRY HARRIS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES D. MARSHALL, Warden, T. J. STEELE, JAMES GOMEZ, Director Department of Corrections and others
Leon Parrish Marshall v. Harold W. Clarke
as 17-6914
Petitioner - Appellant:
LEON PARRISH MARSHALL
Respondent - Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Department of Corrections
Charles Edward Gary v. Harold W. Clarke
as 17-6882
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHARLES EDWARD GARY
Respondent - Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director Department of Corrections of Virginia
Kenneth Newkirk v. Director, Dept. of Correction
as 17-6779
Petitioner - Appellant:
KENNETH H. NEWKIRK
Respondent - Appellee:
DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
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.
