Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Rochester v. Stirling et al
as 6:2022cv04313
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
Director Stirling, H D McMaster, Squeezables Elwood International and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv01685
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Rochester v. Williams et al
as 6:2021cv03413
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
C ` Williams, B Stirling, H D McMaster and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Williams et al
as 6:2021cv03045
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
C Williams, J L Harrison, H D McMaster and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Williams et al
as 6:2021cv02732
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
C Williams, B Stirling, A Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Bryant et al
as 6:2021cv01880
Defendant:
K Bryant, B Stirling, Food Services Staff and others
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Invacare Corporation et al
as 6:2020cv04261
Defendant:
B Stirling, Tamaulipas Reymosa, Alan M Wilson and others
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Clerk et al
as 6:2020cv04249
Defendant:
Oconee County Magistrate Judges, Beth Drake, United States Marshal's Service and others
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Trump et al
as 1:2020cv01706
Petitioner:
Julian E. Rochester and J-Rock
Respondent:
Beth Drake, U.S.D.C.-Dist. of So. Car. Divs., H. D. McMaster and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Rochester v. Williams et al
as 1:2020cv01705
Petitioner:
Julian E. Rochester and J-Rock
Respondent:
B. Stirling, R. B. Harwell, S. C. Admin. Law Court and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
