Cases 31 - 40 of 67
Carter v. Merlak et al
as 4:2016cv00851
Plaintiff:
Brian Carter
Defendant:
S. Merlak, FCI Elkton Medical Department Administrator and BOP NE Regional Office Director
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carter v. BOP Northeast Regional Director et al
as 4:2016cv00373
Plaintiff:
Curtis Carter
Defendant:
BOP Northeast Regional Director, FCI Elkton Warden, USP Hazelton Satellite Camp Administrator and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Galanis v. United States of America et al
as 4:2015cv01536
Plaintiff:
James S. Galanis
Defendant:
United States of America and U.S. DOJ BOP
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Montarius Cox v. USA, et al
as 15-5642
Petitioner - Appellant:
MONTARIUS KINTE COX
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ATTORNEY GENERAL and BOP
Frye v. United States Government et al
as 5:2014cv01017
Plaintiff:
Matthew Frye, Jr.
Defendant:
United States Government, Lt. Kirkland, E. Velez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Norris v. Eargle et al
as 1:2014cv00906
Plaintiff:
Larry Norris
Defendant:
Mr. Eargle, Mr. Chrissman, Mr. Stewart and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Corey Burgess v. BOP, et al
as 14-5379
Plaintiff - Appellant:
COREY BURGESS
Defendant - Appellee:
BOP, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, DESIGNATION SENTENCE COMPUTATION CENTER, "DSCC" Office of Information Policy and others
Mehmeti v. Warden FCI Elkton et al
as 4:2014cv00547
Petitioner:
Faik Mehmeti
Respondent:
Warden FCI Elkton and US DOJ BOP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Soto v. North Eastern Ohio Correctional Center et al
as 4:2014cv00297
Plaintiff:
Eden Soto
Defendant:
North Eastern Ohio Correctional Center, Federal BOP and U.S. Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Frye v. BOP Staff et al
as 1:2013cv02774
Plaintiff:
Matthew Frye, Jr.
Defendant:
BOP Staff, Jr. Bell, Counselor Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
