Cases 1 - 10 of 45
Conley v. United States Postal Service et al
as 4:2025cv00188
Plaintiff:
David Conley
Defendant:
United States Postal Service and UPS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Conley v. Cooper et al
as 4:2025cv00189
Plaintiff:
David Conley
Defendant:
Jacob Cooper and James Harrison
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Conley v. Jaguar Land Rover NA HQ, et al.
as 1:2024cv00607
Plaintiff:
David Conley
Defendant:
Doe Defendants I-X and Jaguar Land Rover NA HQ
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Anderson v. Conley et al
as 1:2024cv00700
Plaintiff:
David M. Anderson
Defendant:
David Conley and Officer Fore
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harris v. Redwood et al
as 1:2024cv00306
Defendant:
Kelly Storm, Dr. Aradhana Gill, R. Hale and others
Plaintiff:
James Harris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Williams v. Port Huron, City of et al
as 2:2023cv12613
Plaintiff:
Bernard Williams
Defendant:
Port Huron, City of, James Gilbert, Brandon Pomranke and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Feaster v. Chambers-Smith et al
as 1:2022cv00453
Plaintiff:
Terrance J Feaster
Defendant:
Annette Chambers-Smith, Ronald T. Erdos, Greg Holdren and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Feaster v. Chambers-Smith et al
as 1:2022cv00313
Plaintiff:
Terrance J Feaster
Defendant:
Annette Chambers-Smith, Ronald T. Erdos, Cynthia Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas Coverdale v. David Conley
as 22-3378
Plaintiff / Appellant:
THOMAS A. COVERDALE
Defendant / Appellee:
DAVID CONLEY, In his official and individual capacities as an employee of Southern Ohio Correctional Facility
Conley v. USA
as 4:2022cv00007
Petitioner:
David Conley
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
