Cases 1 - 10 of 2,585
Wintrode v. Carter et al
as 1:2024cv00227
Petitioner:
Joshwa Aaron Wintrode
Respondent:
Tom Carter and Twin Falls County Adult Detention Facility
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sullivan v. State of Montana, et al.
as 24-2682
Plaintiff:
RYAN PATRICK SULLIVAN
Defendant:
STATE OF MONTANA, YELLOWSTONE COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY, OFFICER WOLD and others
Wintrode v. Carter et al
as 1:2024cv00192
Plaintiff:
Joshwa Aaron Wintrode
Defendant:
Tom Carter, Chris Hogan, Randall Buffalo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tripati v. Carter, et al.
as 24-2191
Plaintiff:
ANANT KUMAR TRIPATI
Defendant:
PAUL EDWARD CARTER, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, UNKNOWN CARTER, MICHAEL EVAN GOTTFRIED and others
Israel v. Carter, et al.
as 24-1974
Plaintiff:
AKIVA AVIKAIDA ISRAEL
Defendant:
RUBY CARTER, SHAWNTEL SNOW, DAWN SANTOS and others
Carter v. Lawrence et al
as 2:2024cv00670
Plaintiff:
Taneysha Carter
Defendant:
Drew Lawrence and Mesa, City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Carter v. Johnson et al
as 1:2024cv00138
Plaintiff:
Samuel Carter
Defendant:
Tommy Johnson, John Schell, Wendel Yoda and others
Interested Party:
Litigation Coordinator, State of Hawaii
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wintrode v. Twin Falls County Jail et al
as 1:2024cv00153
Plaintiff:
Joshwa Aaron Wintrode
Defendant:
Twin Falls County Jail, Twin Falls County Sheriff and Tom Carter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dante Danil Carter v. F. Guzman
as 5:2024cv00567
Petitioner:
Dante Danil Carter
Respondent:
F Guzman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Chan v. Abe et al
as 2:2024cv00552
Plaintiff:
Chik Chan
Defendant:
Atsushi Abe, Alan Campbell, Susan K Carter and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22 Securities Fraud
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.
