Cases 41 - 49 of 49
Riches v. Randolph et al
as 2:2008cv00220
Petitioner:
Jonathan Lee Riches
Respondent:
Willie Randolph, Omar Minaya, Fred Wilpon and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Riches v. Netspend Corp et al
as 2:2008cv00211
Petitioner:
Jonathan Lee Riches
Respondent:
Netspend Corp, MPower Ventures LP, Grupo Omnilife SA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Riches v. Constanza ETRO et al
as 2:2008cv00182
Petitioner:
Jonathan Lee Riches
Respondent:
Constanza ETRO, Kean ETRO and Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Farnsworth v. Palmquist et al
as 2:2008cv00820
Plaintiff:
Charles V Farnsworth
Defendant:
Robert J. Palmquist and Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Bell v. United States of America et al
as 3:2007cv05680
Petitioner:
James Dalton Bell
Respondent:
United States of America, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Department of Justice and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Strickland v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 3:2007cv05542
Petitioner:
William James Strickland
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Suero-Peralta v. United States of America et al
as 2:2007cv00850
Petitioner:
Raymond Suero-Peralta
Respondent:
United States of America and United States Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Edwards v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 2:2007cv00099
Plaintiff:
Shane W Edwards
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons and Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Edwards v. Bureau of Prisons
as 3:2007cv05033
Plaintiff:
Shane Wesley Edwards
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 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.
