Cases 1 - 10 of 43
TALBERT v. IRWIN et al
as 2:2024cv00675
Plaintiff:
CHARLES TALBERT
Defendant:
RANDY IRWIN, JOHN BLICHA, IAN GUSTAFSON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal
TALBERT v. IRWIN et al
as 1:2024cv00122
Plaintiff:
CHARLES TALBERT
Defendant:
RANDY IRWIN, JOHN BLICHA, IAN GUSTAFSON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 cr Notice of Removal - Civil Rights
v. STOCKTON et al
as 2:2024cv00564
Defendant:
RONALD STOCKTON, LAUREL HARRY, RANDY IRWIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
STOCKTON v. HARRY et al
as 1:2024cv00112
Plaintiff:
RONALD STOCKTON
Defendant:
LAUREL HARRY, RANDY IRWIN, DEPUTY M-BLICHA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
WALLACE v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2024cv00035
Plaintiff:
SHAWN WALLACE
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, HARRY, L. HARRY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
STOCKTON et al v. HARRY et al
as 1:2024cv00033
Plaintiff:
RONALD STOCKTON, THOMAS W. MCCUNE, BRIAN NELSON and others
Defendant:
LAUREL HENRY, SUPERINTENDANT R. IRWIN, DEPUTY SUPT. I. GUSTAFSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
STOCKTON v. HARRY et al
as 1:2024cv00035
Plaintiff:
RONALD STOCKTON
Defendant:
LAUREL HARRY, SUPERINTENDENT R. IRWIN, R. MARSH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
STOCKTON v. HARRY et al
as 1:2024cv00034
Plaintiff:
RONALD STOCKTON
Defendant:
LAUREL HARRY, G. LETTLE, G. LITTLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
In re: David Kauffman
as 23-3179
Petitioner:
In re: DAVID R. KAUFFMAN
Respondent:
BARRY SMITH, ERIC YOUNG, BORDAS and others
PATRICK v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2023cv00352
Plaintiff:
CHRISTIAN PATRICK
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS doing business as SCI FOREST, RANDY IRWIN, IAN GUSTAFSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
