Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Liles v. Department of the Navy Board for Correction of Naval Records
as 5:2021cv01011
Appellant:
Dale D Liles
Appellee:
Department of the Navy Board for Correction of Naval Records
Cause Of Action: 10 U.S.C. § 1552
Lay, et al v. El Habti, et al
as 21-6101
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WADE LAY
Not Yet Classified:
BRENDA E. ANDREW, JAMES A. CODDINGTON, BENJAMIN R. COLE and others
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS ALEXANDER DAVIS, SHELTON D. JACKSON, JULIUS D. JONES and others
Defendant / Appellee:
ABOUTANAA EL HABTI, Warden, Mabel Bassett Correctional Center, in her official capacity, SCOTT CROW, Director, ODOC, in his official capacity, RANDY CHANDLER and others
Defendant:
JOE M. ALLBAUGH, IV TEAM LEADER, IV TEAM MEMBERS#1-10 and others
Amicus Curiae:
ALL NON-PARTY PLAINTIFFS, EXCEPT WADE LAW
Thomas v. Stitt, et al
as 21-6011
Defendant / Appellee:
STEVEN BICKLEY, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board, SCOTT CROW, Director of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections, T. HASTINGS SIEGFRIED, Chair of the Oklahoma Board of Corrections and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DWAIN EDWARD THOMAS
Johnson v. OK-DOC Board of Corrections, et al
as 19-5105
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHAEL ROACH, Chairman of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections Board of Corrections and OK-DOC BOARD OF CORRECTIONS
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOHN LEE JOHNSON
Farley v. Army Board for Correction of Military Records et al
as 1:2015cv00161
Petitioner:
James Marcus Farley
Respondent:
Army Board for Correction of Military Records , Secretary of the Army and Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Farley v. Army Review Board
as 14-9607
Petitioner:
JAMES MARCUS FARLEY
Respondent:
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
In re: Berryhill
as 10-7053
Petitioner:
LAVERN BERRYHILL
Respondent:
BRAD HENRY, Governor of Oklahoma, JARI ASKINS, Lieutenant Governor of Oklahoma, W.A. DREW EDMONDSON, Attorney General, Attorney General 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.
