Cases 11 - 20 of 34
Searcy v. Fifth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida et al
as 1:2014cv21060
Plaintiff:
Edgar Searcy
Defendant:
Fifth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, Twentieth Judicial District Court of Kansas and Southern District Of Florida
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Searcy v. Fifth Judicial Circuit for Sumter County, Florida et al
as 5:2014cv00176
Plaintiff:
Edgar Searcy
Defendant:
Fifth Judicial Circuit for Sumter County, Florida, Twentieth District of Barton County, Kansas and Kevin Michael Moore
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Searcy v. Sumter County Florida et al
as 5:2014cv03046
Plaintiff:
Edgar Searcy
Defendant:
Sumter County Florida, Barton County Kansas and Kevin Michael Moore
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
SEARCY v. YOUNG et al
as 1:2012cv01625
Petitioner:
EDGAR SEARCY
Respondent:
JOSEPH YOUNG, ERIC HOLDER and UNITED STATES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Searcy v. Young et al
as 2:2012cv01556
Plaintiff:
Edgar Searcy
Defendant:
Joseph Young and Eric Holder
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Edgar Searcy v. Joseph Young, et al
as 12-30398
Petitioner - Appellant:
EDGAR SEARCY
Respondent - Appellee:
JOSEPH P YOUNG, individually and in his official capacity and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Searcy v. Unknown Employees et al
as 2:2011cv00218
Plaintiff:
Edgar Searcy
Defendant:
Unknown Employees, Joseph P Young, U S Bureau of Prisons and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Edgar Searcy v. Joseph P. Young, et al
as 2:2011cv00217
Plaintiff:
Edgar Searcy
Defendant:
Joseph P Young and USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Searcy v. United States of America
as 2:2010cv14222
Plaintiff:
Edgar Searcy
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv23586
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Writ of Mandamus
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.
