Cases 31 - 40 of 436
Vaughn v. Akers et al
as 5:2023cv00260
Plaintiff:
David Paul Vaughn
Defendant:
Sgt. Daniel Akers, Sgt. C. Griffin, Officer Campbell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Vaughn v. Akers et al
as 3:2023cv00472
Plaintiff:
David Paul Vaughn
Defendant:
Daniel Akers, Sgt. C. Griffin, C/O Campbell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DeLeo v. Paul
as 5:2023cv00241
Petitioner:
Ralph Francis DeLeo
Respondent:
Warden David Paul
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Frazer v. United States of America et al
as 5:2023cv00235
Plaintiff:
John J. Frazer
Defendant:
United States of America and Warden David Paul
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Baranowski v. Garland et al
as 4:2023cv02632
Plaintiff:
David Paul Baranowski
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur Mendoza Jaddou and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
King v. Paul, Warden
as 5:2023cv00207
Petitioner:
Daaron Edward King
Respondent:
David Paul, Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Moten v. Def Jam Recordings et al
as 6:2023cv00030
Plaintiff:
Bishop David Paul Moten
Defendant:
DEF JAM RECORDINGS, UMG RECORDINGS, INC, YE f/k/a KANYE WEST and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Ragland v. Paul, Warden
as 2:2023cv02294
Petitioner:
James Ragland
Respondent:
David Paul, Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ragland v. Paul, Warden
as 5:2023cv00160
Petitioner:
James Ragland
Respondent:
David Paul, Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Smith v. Paul
as 5:2023cv00132
Petitioner:
Ronald E. Smith
Respondent:
Warden David Paul
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.
