Cases 51 - 60 of 268
OGLE et al v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2022cv00286
Plaintiff:
BRYAN A. OGLE
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, T. CRECELIUS, D. RUSSELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SAINTIGNON v. VANIHEL et al
as 2:2022cv00266
Plaintiff:
DANNY L. SAINTIGNON, JR.
Defendant:
VANIHEL, K. GILMORE, M. ELLIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SHORTER v. HOLCOMB et al
as 2:2022cv00196
Plaintiff:
ROBERT SHORTER
Defendant:
C. HOLCOMB, DUSTY MILLER, FRANK VANIHEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SHORTER v. VANIHEL et al
as 2:2022cv00187
Plaintiff:
ROBERT SHORTER
Defendant:
FRANK VANIHEL, FAUST, WALKER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ELLIS v. JOHN
as 1:2022cv00878
Plaintiff:
DEMAJIO JEROME ELLIS
Defendant:
JOHN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILLIAMS v. VANIHEL et al
as 2:2022cv00181
Plaintiff:
CAMERON T. WILLIAMS
Defendant:
FRANK VANIHEL, DAVID ARCHER, COLE BANTA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ELLIS v. SEVIER
as 1:2022cv00626
Petitioner:
DEMAJIO JEROME ELLIS
Respondent:
SEVIER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Skinner v. Hyatte et al
as 3:2022cv00171
Defendant:
Mitchell, Hyatte, Payne and others
Plaintiff:
Antoine Skinner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ELLIS v. WOODRUFF et al
as 4:2022cv00024
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ELLIS
Defendant:
LAURA WOODRUFF, AGC LEASING LLC and GO-TO TRANSPORT, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
ELLIS v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, THE
as 2:2022cv00075
Petitioner:
RAHLIEGH X. ELLIS
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, THE
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.
