Cases 61 - 70 of 269
Akins v. Mitchell et al
as 1:2022cv03349
Petitioner:
Francisco Akins
Respondent:
David Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tackett v. Mitchell et al
as 3:2022cv01260
Plaintiff:
Justin Tackett
Defendant:
David Mitchell, Meyers, Christine Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Crawford v. Clark et al
as 3:2022cv01173
Plaintiff:
Jared R. Crawford
Defendant:
Jayson Clark, Kenny Shires, Harrisburg Police Dept and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sparks v. Mitchell
as 1:2022cv02776
Petitioner:
Terrence Sparks
Respondent:
David Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JONES v. MITCHELL
as 3:2022cv00070
Petitioner:
DAVID JONES
Respondent:
DAVID MITCHELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Van Pelt v. Mitchell
as 2:2022cv02097
Petitioner:
Ronald M Van Pelt
Respondent:
David Mitchell
Not Classified By Court:
Habeas Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Staley v. Pritzker et al
as 1:2022cv01824
Plaintiff:
David James Staley
Defendant:
J B Pritzker, Rob Jeffreys, Jeffrey M Dennison and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Calhoun v. Mitchell et al
as 3:2022cv00509
Plaintiff:
DiVonte Calhoun
Defendant:
David Mitchell, Lu Walker, Devan Fischer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cleveland v. Blum et al
as 3:2022cv00456
Plaintiff:
Richard Cleveland
Defendant:
Bob Blum, Percey Myers, Christine Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cobbins v. Mitchell
as 1:2022cv01041
Petitioner:
Angelo Cobbins
Respondent:
David Mitchell
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.
