Cases 1 - 10 of 39
Flowers et al v. Nevels et al
as 1:2019cv00115
Defendant:
Ken Faulk, Greg Zoeller, Reggie Nevels and others
Plaintiff:
Jerome Flowers, Jonny Drake and Wheel Love
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hoglund v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2017cv00824
Plaintiff:
Keith Hoglund
Defendant:
Indiana State of, Edgar D Whitcomb, Mitch Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mayweather-Brown v. Rodgers et al
as 3:2016cv00445
Plaintiff:
Quintin Mayweather-Brown
Defendant:
Bradley Rodgers, Ron Harvey, Fred Mock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Hunter v. Greg Zoeller
as 16-1838
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL HOWARD HUNTER
Respondent - Appellee:
GREG ZOELLER
Hill-Bey v. United States et al
as 1:2016cv00116
Plaintiff:
Danny Hill-Bey
Defendant:
United States, Wayne Seybold, Scott Haley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Howard Hunter v. Greg Zoeller
as 16-1379
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL HOWARD HUNTER
Respondent - Appellee:
GREG ZOELLER
BLAKEY v. HENDRIX et al
as 1:2016cv00412
Plaintiff:
JESSE BLAKEY
Defendant:
JACK HENDRIX, BRUCE LEMMON and GREG ZOELLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HUNTER v.ZOELLER
as 3:2016cv00018
Petitioner:
MICHAEL HOWARD HUNTER
Respondent:
UNKNOWN NAMED DIRECTOR OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and GREG ZOELLER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
HUNTER v. GREG ZOELLER, INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL
as 3:2016cv00010
Petitioner:
MICHAEL HOWARD HUNTER
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNKNOWN NAMED DIRECTOR OF INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and GREG ZOELLER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
BLAYLOCK v. COMER et al
as 1:2015cv02086
Defendant:
SUSAN AUSTIN, PATRICIA BALDWIN, MISCE CAMPBELL and others
Plaintiff:
JOHN BLAYLOCK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
