Cases 1 - 10 of 50
Waseem Daker v. Timothy Ward, et al
as 23-11445
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WASEEM DAKER
Defendant / Appellee:
TIMOTHY WARD, JACK KOON, ROBERT TOOLE and others
Parker v. Gould et al
as 1:2023cv00075
Plaintiff:
Gary Dean Parker, Jr
Defendant:
Anthony Gould, J. Moore, LT Littrel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Waseem Daker v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections, et al
as 23-10798
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WASEEM DAKER
Defendant / Appellee:
COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, JACK KOON, STEVE UPON and others
Waseem Daker v. Timothy Ward, et al
as 23-10630
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WASEEM DAKER
Defendant / Appellee:
TIMOTHY WARD, JACK KOON, ROBERT TOOLE and others
Chambers v. Ishee et al
as 5:2023cv00005
Plaintiff:
Patrick J. Chambers
Defendant:
Todd Ishee, FNU Dye, Richard Bates and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
In re: Waseem Daker
as 22-11983
Petitioner:
In re: WASEEM DAKER
Respondent:
COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, JACK KOON, ROBERT TOOLE and others
Cobb v. Haddon, et al
as 22-4048
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRENT MAYON COBB
Defendant / Appellee:
LARRY BENZON, Warden, Utah State Prison, MIKE HADDON, Executive Director, Utah State Prison, KENT DEMILL, Board of Pardons Chair Person and others
Daker v. Ward et al
as 6:2022cv00036
Plaintiff:
Waseem Daker
Defendant:
Timothy Ward, Jack Koon, Steve Upon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Scott v. Department of Corrections et al
as 5:2022cv00170
Plaintiff:
Briana N Scott
Defendant:
Department of Corrections, FNU Roberts, FNU Baker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cobb v. Haddon, et al
as 22-4016
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRENT MAYON COBB
Defendant / Appellee:
MIKE HADDON, Executive Director, Utah State Prison, LARRY BENZON, Warden Utah State Prison, KENT DEMILL, Board of Pardons chair person and others
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.
