Cases 31 - 40 of 102
Baker v. Strange et al
as 3:2023cv05072
Plaintiff:
David Michael Aaron Baker
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange, James Key, Ron Haynes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Martin v. Strange
as 3:2023cv05039
Plaintiff:
Michael Martin
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Perez v Strange et al
as 3:2023cv05008
Plaintiff:
Daniel Jay Perez
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange, Karie Rainer, Traci Drake and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Clayton v. Strange et al
as 3:2022cv06015
Plaintiff:
James Edward Clayton and Okie Redpaw
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange, Casey Kaech, Lara Stick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stroman v. Strange et al
as 4:2022cv05159
Plaintiff:
Elijah M Stroman
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange and Donald Holbrok
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Headrick v. Haynes
as 3:2022cv05895
Petitioner:
John Griffin Headrick
Respondent:
Cheryl Strange and Ron Haynes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Williams v. Strange et al
as 3:2022cv05867
Plaintiff:
Kenneth S Williams
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange and Jose Corrales
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Scollard v. Stafford Creek Corrections Center et al
as 3:2022cv05851
Plaintiff:
Devon J Scollard
Defendant:
Stafford Creek Corrections Center, Cheryl Strange, Barry DeHaven and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Headrick v. Strange
as 2:2022cv00226
Petitioner:
John Griffin Headrick
Respondent:
Cheryl Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Demos v. Strange et al
as 4:2022cv05125
Plaintiff:
John Robert Demos, Jr
Defendant:
Cheryl Strange, H.L. Griffith, Robert M Jackson and others
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.
