Cases 1 - 10 of 144
Willis v. Palmer
as 1:2024cv01751
Respondent:
Warden Bryant Palmer
Petitioner:
Courtney D. Willis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Daniel v. Peterson et al
as 3:2024cv01512
Defendant:
Daniel Monti, Christine Vineyard, MHP Murray and others
Plaintiff:
Ashton Daniel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILLIS v. REAGLE
as 1:2024cv00255
Petitioner:
DENNIS D. WILLIS and WESLEY WILLIS
Respondent:
DENNIS REAGLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cervantes v. Willis et al
as 3:2023cv02176
Plaintiff:
Marcos Cervantes
Defendant:
Anthony D Willis, Daniel C Porter, Alex A Maldonado and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Willis v. Olgam Life Plasma Center
as 2:2023cv14127
Plaintiff:
Ladravrus D. Willis
Defendant:
Olgam Life Plasma Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Clarke v. Willis
as 1:2023cv01889
Plaintiff:
Shawanda Clarke
Defendant:
Helen D. Willis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Glass v. Clayton County Superior Court et al
as 1:2022cv05009
Plaintiff:
Kardarius Kantrez Glass
Defendant:
Clayton County Superior Court and Jacqueline D. Willis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Willis v. '-Gate' et al
as 3:2022cv01456
Plaintiff:
(SIC) His Sovereignty Steven I, Steven D. Willis and Steven Dawayne Willis
Defendant:
'-Gate', Air (phone) and Multnomah Bar Association
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILLIS v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv14832
Plaintiff:
KEVIN WILLIS and KEVIN D WILLIS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
WILLIS v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
as 2:2022cv02682
Plaintiff:
TAZMIN D. WILLIS
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
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.
