Cases 61 - 70 of 1,250
Jamison v. Clarke et al
as 3:2023cv00356
Plaintiff:
Daniel W. Jamison
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Mark Amonette, MD, Steve Herrick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adams v. Horne et al
as 7:2023cv00317
Plaintiff:
Dominique Herman Adams
Defendant:
Johnathan S. Horne, D. Rose, Brian Vanover and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pledger v. Clarke et al
as 7:2023cv00313
Plaintiff:
Niccokawon Pledger
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Kyle Rosch, David Anderson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Darr v. Stout et al
as 7:2023cv00298
Plaintiff:
William Allen Darr, Jr.
Defendant:
C/O R. Stout, Harold W. Clarke and Warden Phillip White
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Biaselli v. Clark
as 7:2023cv00278
Petitioner:
Derek James Biaselli
Respondent:
Harold W. Clark
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Frost et al
as 7:2023cv00277
Plaintiff:
Trevor Andrew Jones
Defendant:
Barbara Frost, Michael Berry, D. Bland and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jamison v. Clarke et al
as 3:2023cv00334
Plaintiff:
Daniel W. Jamison
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Mark Amonette, Steve Herrick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Arrington v. Clarke
as 7:2023cv00275
Petitioner:
Javon Lamont Arrington
Respondent:
Unknown and Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Biaselli v. Clark
as 2:2023cv00209
Petitioner:
Derek James Biaselli
Respondent:
Harold W. Clark
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jamison v. Clarke et al
as 3:2023cv00316
Plaintiff:
Daniel W. Jamison
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, MD Mark Amonette, Steve Herrick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
