Cases 31 - 40 of 1,039
Woods v. Doe
as 2:2024cv00026
Plaintiff:
Demetrius Woods and Demetrius L Woods
Defendant:
Doe, Gary Musslelwhite, Pierce and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Beverage et al
as 5:2024cv04006
Plaintiff:
Cody L Smith
Defendant:
Steve Beverage, Sr, Kelsey Speed, Angla Kolker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Beverage et al
as 4:2024cv00043
Plaintiff:
Cody L. Smith
Defendant:
Steve Beverage, Sr., Kelsey Speed, Angla Kolker and others
Interested Party:
H. Loraine Wallace
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hawkins v. Adams
as 4:2024cv00080
Petitioner:
Shallon Hawkins
Respondent:
Richard Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ray v. Adams
as 4:2024cv00165
Plaintiff:
Hubert J. Ray
Respondent:
Richard Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Adam Grady v. Brent Fluke, et al
as 24-1094
Petitioner:
Adam Owen Grady
Respondent:
Warden Brent Fluke and Attorney General for the State of South Dakota
Adams v. USA
as 2:2024cv04003
Petitioner:
Shunta Lamont Adams
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Hawkins v. Adams
as 4:2024cv00069
Petitioner:
Shallon Hawkins
Respondent:
Richard Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mack v. Studdard et al
as 4:2024cv04002
Plaintiff:
Malcolm Cornelius Mack and Mal
Defendant:
Correctional Officer Studdard, Sheriff Wayne Easley, Warden Jeffie Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Happy Stompingbear v. Wendy Kelley, et al
as 24-1011
Plaintiff:
Happy Stompingbear, also known as Chris Ward
Defendant:
Wendy Kelley, former Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, Marshall Dale Reed, Chief Deputy Director, ADC, Marvin Evans 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.
