Cases 1 - 10 of 17
BROWN v. RIEGER et al
as 2:2022cv00259
Petitioner:
SUZANNE BROWN
Respondent:
KIMBERLY RIEGER and BUREAU OF PRISONS NORTHEAST RESIDENTIAL RENTRY MANAGEMENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
JAMES v. LANDRY et al
as 2:2021cv00371
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JOHN JAMES and MICHEAL JOHN JAMES
Defendant:
SCOTT LANDRY, GLEN BROWN, SUE CARR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ADAMS v. LANDRY et al
as 2:2017cv00357
Plaintiff:
JON ROBERT ADAMS
Defendant:
SCOTT R LANDRY, JOSEPH FITZPATRICK, SCOTT MCCAFFERY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GROSS v. LANDRY et al
as 2:2017cv00297
Plaintiff:
BRANDON M GROSS
Defendant:
SCOTT R LANDRY, GLEAN BROWN, SUSAN CARR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BATTLE v. MAINE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES et al
as 1:2017cv00131
Plaintiff:
JOSEPH MACK BATTLE, JR
Defendant:
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, SOMERSET COUNTY, STATE OF MAINE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BROWNE v. MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2016cv00619
Plaintiff:
ALBION SAVAGE BROWNE
Defendant:
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, MAINE CORRECTIONAL CENTER SECURITY STAFF and MEDICAL STAFF AND PROVIDERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SCHOFF v. FITZPATRICK et al
as 2:2016cv00609
Plaintiff:
STEVEN R SCHOFF, JR
Defendant:
JOSEPH FITZPATRICK, JODY BRETON, SCOTT LANDRY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BROWN, SR v. USA
as 1:2016cv00511
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
PRESTON BROWN, SR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
BROWN v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS EMPLOYEES/STAFF et al
as 1:2016cv00440
Plaintiff:
JAMIE BROWN
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS EMPLOYEES/STAFF, SAMANTHA K BROOKE SHEEHAN, ADRIANNE DILL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BROWN v. LANDRY
as 2:2016cv00167
Petitioner:
BRANDON S BROWN
Respondent:
SCOTT LANDRY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
