Cases 11 - 20 of 4,344
Spencer v. Pulido-Esparza, et al.
as 24-2444
Plaintiff:
EDWARD B. SPENCER
Defendant:
L. PULIDO-ESPARZA, Correctional Officer at SATF, C. SMITH, Correctional Lieutenant at SATF, STUART SHERMAN, Warden at SATF and others
Cardell Hunes v. Dexter Payne
as 24-1781
Petitioner:
Cardell Hunes
Respondent:
Dexter Payne, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction
State of Alabama et al v. Phelps
as 2:2024cv00227
Plaintiff:
State of Alabama and Alabama Department of Corrections
Defendant:
Wilfred Phelps
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
Pizzuto v. Tewalt, et al.
as 24-2275
Plaintiff:
GERALD ROSS PIZZUTO, JR.
Defendant:
JOSH TEWALT, Director, Idaho Department of Correction, in his official capacity and TYRELL DAVIS, Warden, Idaho Maximum Security Institution, in his official capacity
Larry JamisonIn re: Larry Jamison
as 24-11132
Petitioner:
In re: LARRY LEE JAMISON
Respondent:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Gibbs v. Utilization Review Committee
as 24-891
Plaintiff:
DAVID GIBBS
Defendant:
CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FEDUS, Dr., PILLAI, Dr. and others
Dillon v. Thornell, et al.
as 24-2169
Petitioner:
KRISTOPHER IVON A. DILLON
Respondent:
RYAN THORNELL, DIRECTOR OF THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REHABILITATION and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Cunningham v. Lupis
as 24-844
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. CUNNINGHAM, SR.
Defendant:
FRANCESCO LUPIS, Dr., COLLEEN GALLAGHER, RUDY ALVAREZ and others
WB and B Executive Search v. City of New York
as 24-845
Plaintiff:
WB AND B EXECUTIVE SEARCH
Defendant:
CITY OF NEW YORK, BRAD LANDER, in his capacity as Comptroller of the City of New York, OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK CITY COMPTROLLER 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.
