Cases 1 - 10 of 65
Garrett et al v. Garland et al
as 6:2024cv03076
Plaintiff:
Dwayne M Garrett and Paul Leroy Wickham
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, Mike Johnson, Eastern District of Oklahoma and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00378
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Reid v. Garland
as 4:2024cv00261
Plaintiff:
Terrell Reid
Defendant:
Merrick B. Garland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00217
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Ehrenfeld v. McDonough et al
as 6:2024cv03021
Plaintiff:
Jay Herbert Ehrenfeld
Defendant:
Denis McDonough, Merrick Garland and Charlotte Burrows
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Williams v. Caldwell County Detention Center et al
as 5:2023cv06159
Plaintiff:
Davon R Williams
Defendant:
Caldwell County Detention Center, Autumn Evans, Mitch Allen and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00754
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv01272
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Perez v. Biden et al
as 1:2023cv00169
Plaintiff:
Jose A Perez
Defendant:
Joseph R. Biden, Merrick B. Garland and US Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv06103
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure 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.
