Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Harris v. Ely State Prison Staff, et al.
as 24-1699
Defendant / Appellee:
WILLIAM REUBART
Plaintiff:
AMMAR HARRIS
Defendant:
ELY STATE PRISON STAFF, STEVEN SISOLAK, BARBARA CEGAVSKE and others
Harris v. Daniels, et al.
as 24-878
Plaintiff:
AMMAR HARRIS
Defendant:
CHARLES DANIELS, BRIAN WILLIAMS, SR., MICHAEL MINEV and others
Harris v. Lombardo et al
as 2:2023cv02135
Petitioner:
Ammar Harris
Respondent:
Joe Lombardo and Nevada Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ammar Harris v. Ely State Prison Staff, et al
as 23-15466
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AMMAR HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
ELY STATE PRISON STAFF, STEVEN SISOLAK, AARON FORD and others
Appellee:
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Ammar Harris v. F. Dreesen, et al
as 23-15467
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AMMAR HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
F. DREESEN, MORIN, CALVIN JOHNSON and others
Appellee:
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Ammar Harris v. Charles Daniels, et al
as 23-15347
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AMMAR HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
CHARLES DANIELS, BRIAN WILLIAMS, Sr., MICHAEL MINEV and others
Ammar Harris v. County of Clark, et al
as 23-15218
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AMMAR HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
COUNTY OF CLARK, STEVEN B. WOLFSON, KATHLEEN E. DELANEY and others
Harris v. Dreesen et al
as 2:2022cv01231
Plaintiff:
Ammar Harris
Defendant:
F. Dreesen, Morin, Johnson and others
Interested Party:
Nevada Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harris v. Sisolak et al
as 2:2022cv01058
Plaintiff:
Ammar Harris
Defendant:
Steven Sisolak, Barbara Cegavske, Charles Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ammar Harris v. Ely State Prison Staff, et al
as 22-15548
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AMMAR HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
ELY STATE PRISON STAFF, STEVEN SISOLAK, AARON FORD 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.
