Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Jamal v. Sailer et al
as 1:2009cv01420
Plaintiff:
Yaphet K Jamal
Defendant:
Paul Sailer, Dennis Smith and Jeffrey Rendon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ross v. Smith
as 1:2009cv01325
Petitioner:
Clinton Earl Ross, Jr
Respondent:
Denny Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Serra v. Smith et al
as 1:2009cv01308
Plaintiff:
David Serra
Defendant:
Denny Smith, Lori Gregory and . Moats
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Peterson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2009cv01293
Plaintiff:
Angelita L Peterson
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Dennis Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
McNeal v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2009cv01289
Plaintiff:
Latrice McNeal
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Dennis Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Thomas v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2009cv01288
Plaintiff:
Gilda Thomas
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Dennis Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Walton v. Smith
as 1:2009cv01285
Petitioner:
Antonio Walton
Respondent:
Denny Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Carroll v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2009cv01284
Plaintiff:
Lisa Carroll
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Dennis Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Bates v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2009cv01281
Plaintiff:
Paula Bates
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Dennis Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Ester v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2009cv01278
Plaintiff:
LaSharne Ester
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Dennis Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
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.
