Cases 31 - 40 of 47
JOHNSON v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2017cv00122
Plaintiff:
BRUCE D. JOHNSON
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JOHNSON-EL v. STATE OF INDIANA et al
as 1:2016cv03417
Petitioner:
BRUCE D. JOHNSON-EL
Respondent:
THOR R. MILLER and STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JOHNSON v. COLVIN
as 1:2016cv01439
Defendant:
CAROLYN W. COLVIN
Plaintiff:
LAMONT D JOHNSON
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only) and USM (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Johnson-El et al v Indiana State of et al
as 3:2015cv00210
Petitioner:
Bruce D. Johnson-El
Respondent:
Indiana State of and Thor R Miller
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
JOHNSON-EL et al v. MILLER
as 1:2015cv00437
Petitioner:
BRUCE D. JOHNSON-EL
Respondent:
THOR R. MILLER and STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2014cv00140
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
IMO 2014 Attorney Mass Suspension
as 2:2014mc00062
Respondent:
Sara Elizabeth Corbat, Danel Michelle Nickels, Duane Jonathan Snow and others
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Type:
Other Statutes
JOHNSON v. CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES INC. et al
as 1:2014cv00049
Respondent:
MARY BLOOMQUIST, CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES INC., ROBERT EICHELBERGER and others
Petitioner:
RICKY D. JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv01844
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Johnson v. Superintendent
as 3:2012cv00690
Petitioner:
Rodney D Johnson
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
