Cases 1 - 10 of 1,522
Lomax v. Williams et al
as 2:2024cv00924
Petitioner:
Nathan Louis Lomax
Respondent:
Brian Williams, NDOC and The Attorney General of the State of Nevada
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Price v. Breitenbach et al
as 3:2024cv00118
Plaintiff:
Edmond Paul Price
Defendant:
Netanjah Breitenbach, Ball, Wilcoxen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McNeil v. Gittere et al
as 3:2024cv00188
Plaintiff:
Michael McNeil
Defendant:
William Gittere, Walter Romero, Tasheena Cooke and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gardeley v. Dzurenda et al
as 3:2024cv00186
Plaintiff:
Marque Gardeley
Defendant:
James Dzurenda, William A. Gittere, David C. Drummond and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mahmoud v. Williams, et al.
as 24-2623
Petitioner:
MOHAMED ABDALLA MAHMOUD
Respondent:
BRIAN WILLIAMS and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Williams v. General Motors, LLC
as 3:2024cv00309
Plaintiff:
Brian Williams
Defendant:
General Motors, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Crusan v. Williams et al
as 2:2024cv00702
Plaintiff:
Michael Crusan, Sr
Defendant:
Brian Williams, Sr., Medical Director, Aurom and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brumfield v. Williams et al
as 2:2024cv00652
Petitioner:
Keith Deon Brumfield
Respondent:
Brian Williams and The Attorney General of the State of Nevada
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ratcliff v. Williams, et al.
as 24-1828
Plaintiff:
EVAN RATCLIFF
Defendant:
Warden BRIAN WILLIAMS and J. NASH, warden
Jackson v. State of Nevada, et al.
as 24-1771
Plaintiff:
ROBERT JACKSON
Defendant:
STATE OF NEVADA, in relation to The Nevada Department of Corrections, E K MCDANIEL, DWIGHT WALTER NEVEN 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.
