Cases 71 - 80 of 10,816
Jolliff v. Rogers County Sheriff's Department, The et al
as 4:2024cv00065
Plaintiff:
Kathy Jolliff
Defendant:
Rogers County Sheriff's Department, The, John Doe and Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Coker v. Stitt et al
as 5:2024cv00147
Plaintiff:
David Wayne Coker
Defendant:
Kevin Stitt, Kameron Harvanek, Matthew Sinnett and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brooks v. Lilly et al
as 5:2024cv00122
Plaintiff:
Clarence Brooks
Defendant:
Amanda Lilly and Oklahoma State of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Winfrey v. Louthan
as 5:2024cv00310
Petitioner:
Ted James Winfrey
Respondent:
David Louthan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Redbird Medical
as 6:2024cv00113
Plaintiff:
Paul Jones
Defendant:
Redbird Medical
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Skadal v. McIntosh County et al
as 6:2024cv00060
Plaintiff:
Aaron Skadal
Defendant:
McIntosh County, Kevin Ledbetter, Monica Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kellogg v. Aguilera et al
as 5:2024cv00135
Plaintiff:
Timothy James Kellogg
Defendant:
Tony Aguilera, Jace Gilley, Cole Jack and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Grayson v. Bridges
as 6:2024cv00110
Petitioner:
Milton D. Grayson, Jr.
Respondent:
Carrie Bridges
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kliewer v. Garfield County Detention Center et al
as 5:2024cv00124
Plaintiff:
Matthew Kliewer
Defendant:
Garfield County Detention Center, Corey Rink and Daylyn Rivers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Arroliga v. USA
as 4:2024cv00131
Petitioner:
Carlos Alfredo Arroliga
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
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.
