Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Kente Barker v. Robert Carter, Jr., et al
as 22-2572
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KENTE BARKER
Defendant / Appellee:
ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., GWENDOLYN M. HORTH, CHARLES MILLER and others
BARKER v. CARTER et al
as 2:2021cv00413
Plaintiff:
KENTE BARKER
Defendant:
ROBERT CARTER, JR., GWENDOLYN M. HORTH, CHARLES F. MILLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Vincent Klock v. Indiana Parole Board, et al
as 21-2970
Plaintiff / Appellant:
VINCENT KLOCK
Defendant / Appellee:
INDIANA PAROLE BOARD, GWENDOLYN M. HORTH and CRAIG SMITH
SMITH v. NCF et al
as 1:2021cv01794
Defendant:
FREDERICK A. MEDLEY, JAMES W. SHAFFER, CHARLES F. MILLER and others
Plaintiff:
JAMES SMITH, JR.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KLOCK v. INDIANA PAROLE BOARD et al
as 1:2021cv00498
Plaintiff:
VINCENT KLOCK
Defendant:
GWENDOLYN M. HORTH, INDIANA PAROLE BOARD and CRAIG SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Alan Kreilein v. Gwendolyn Horth, et al
as 20-2120
Defendant / Appellee:
GWENDOLYN M. HORTH, Chair, Indiana Parole Board and ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., Commissioner, Indiana Department of Corrections
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALAN KREILEIN
Alan Kreilein v. Gwendolyn Horth, et al
as 20-1994
Defendant / Appellee:
GWENDOLYN M. HORTH, Chair, Indiana Parole Board and ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., Commissioner, Indiana Department of Corrections
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALAN KREILEIN
WHITE-BEY v. HOLCOMB et al
as 2:2020cv00147
Plaintiff:
DONYALL E. WHITE-BEY
Defendant:
FREDRICK A. MEDLEY, JAMES W. SHAFFER, CHARLES F. MILLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WILLIAMS v. HOLCOMB et al
as 1:2020cv00563
Defendant:
DOUG HUYVAERT, DREW ADAMS, ERIC HOLCOMB and others
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA E. WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Donyall White v. Brian Smith, et al
as 19-3433
Petitioner:
DONYALL WHITE
Respondent:
GWENDOLYN M. HORTH, Chair of Parole Board and BRIAN SMITH, Superintendent
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.
