Cases 41 - 50 of 55
SISK v. INDIANA et al
as 2:2013cv00383
Defendant:
PAMLA BAILS, BOBBIE BELDEN, CHRISTINE CLEMENS and others
Plaintiff:
GEORGE SISK
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FORREST v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2013cv00142
Petitioner:
JASON BLAKE FORREST
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv00284
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
FERGUSON v. PUTNAMVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 2:2012cv00058
Petitioner:
FORREST ROBERT FERGUSON
Respondent:
PUTNAMVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY and SUPERINTENDENT, PUTNAMVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FORRESTER v. OSBORN
as 1:2011cv00917
Petitioner:
EARL FORRESTER
Respondent:
MICHAEL OSBORN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FORRESTER v. SUPERINTENDENT OF EDINBURGH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 1:2011cv00662
Petitioner:
EARL FORRESTER
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT OF EDINBURGH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
FORRESTER v. OSBORN
as 1:2011cv00510
Petitioner:
EARL FORRESTER
Respondent:
MICHAEL OSBORN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Groves v. Fee et al
as 1:2011cv00059
Plaintiff:
Dennis R Groves
Defendant:
William C Fee, Christopher M Forrest and Gregory Sowles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv00224
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Forrester v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2010cv00137
Plaintiff:
Barton K Forrester
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
