Cases 81 - 90 of 93
Samuel Rylee v. United States Bureau of Prison
as 09-6501
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SAMUEL WAYNE RYLEE
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, Z. ROBERT VENDEL, M.D., U.S. Bureau of Prisons and M. L. RIVERA, Warden, FCI Estill
Edgar Searcy v. Skinner
as 09-6286
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDGAR SEARCY, a/k/a Edgar Joe Searcy
Defendant - Appellee:
SKINNER, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and others
Michael Ray v. Johnny Simon
as 09-6047
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL R. RAY, a/k/a Michael Robert Ray
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHNNY SIMON, ISM Supervisor FCI Estill, MATTHEW B. HAMIDULLAH, Former Warden FCI Estill, ROY LATHROP, Paralegal SC Consolidated Legal Center FBOP and others
Hayen v. Rivera et al
as 1:2008cv00813
Petitioner:
Vernon K Hayden
Respondent:
M L Rivera and FCI Estill
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
David Harrell v. Mildred Rivera
as 08-8105
Petitioner - Appellant:
DAVID HARRELL
Respondent - Appellee:
MILDRED L. RIVERA, Warden FCI Estill
McGirt v. FCI Estill et al
as 6:2008cv02882
Plaintiff:
Rona Paul McGirt
Defendant:
FCI Estill, Ven Eneje, Jackie Bush and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Michael Ray v. Marilyn Rivera
as 08-6418
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL R. RAY
Respondent - Appellee:
MARILYN L. RIVERA, Warden FCI Estill
Hayen v. Rivera et al
as 4:2008cv00867
Petitioner:
Vernon K Hayden
Respondent:
M L Rivera and FCI Estill
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Ray v. Hamidullah
as 07-7121
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL R. RAY
Respondent - Appellee:
MATTHEW B. HAMIDULLAH, Warden of FCI Estill, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Bolden v. Department of Justice et al
as 8:2007cv01595
Plaintiff:
Troy Bolden
Defendant:
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, FCI Estill and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, Federal Filers (Bivens)
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.
