Cases 51 - 60 of 155
Smith v. Maloney et al
as 1:2017cv01475
Plaintiff:
Adam C Smith
Defendant:
Corey Maloney, Kurt Bode, Robert C Bollinger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Illinois Department of Corrections Records Office et al
as 2:2017cv02243
Plaintiff:
Albert L Johnson
Defendant:
Illinois Department of Corrections Records Office, Prisoner Review Board, Champaign County Parole Division and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Christopher Gates v. Illinois Prisoner Review Board, et al
as 17-2927
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER GATES
Defendant - Appellee:
ILLINOIS PRISONER REVIEW BOARD, in Springfield, IL and ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Lawrence v. Prisoner Review Board
as 3:2017cv50240
Petitioner:
Lennox Lawrence
Respondent:
Prisoner Review Board
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Horton v. Butler et al
as 3:2017cv00802
Plaintiff:
Eugene Horton
Defendant:
Kimberly Butler, Vonetta Harris, Jon Burge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cavette v. Illinois Dept of Correction et al
as 1:2017cv05280
Plaintiff:
Robert Cavette
Defendant:
Illinois Dept of Correction, Prisoner Review Board and J. Baldwin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Heath (ID 63392) v. Norwood et al
as 5:2017cv03114
Petitioner:
Glenn A. Heath
Respondent:
Joe Norwood, Kansas Prison Review Board and Attorney General of Kansas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Long (ID 38855) v. Waddington et al
as 5:2017cv03098
Petitioner:
Michael Ernest Long
Respondent:
Doug Waddington and Prisoner Review Board
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jaglicic v. Illinois Prisoner Review Board
as 1:2017cv01863
Plaintiff:
Eric Jaglicic
Defendant:
Illinois Prisoner Review Board
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Horton v. Butler et al
as 1:2017cv01368
Plaintiff:
Eugene Horton
Defendant:
Kimberly Butler, Vonetta Harris, Jon Burge and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
