Cases 71 - 80 of 3,214
Torrence v. Hamilton
as 3:2024cv00019
Petitioner:
Patrick H. Torrence
Respondent:
Jason Hamilton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Clark, et al
as 24-1015
Plaintiff:
JABARI J. JOHNSON
Defendant:
GILLIAN CLARK, MICHAEL HEGARTY, PAUL WIESE and others
Hamilton v. MECC
as 4:2024cv00062
Plaintiff:
James H. Hamilton
Defendant:
MECC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Manzo-Hernandez v. Clarke et al
as 7:2024cv00013
Plaintiff:
Francisco Manzo-Hernandez
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, Chief of Security Headquarters, T.A. Glenn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Johnson, et al
as 24-1007
Plaintiff:
JABARI J. JOHNSON
Defendant:
JOHNSON, MOSES STANCIL, PLANNEL and others
Bonilla v. Hamilton
as 4:2024cv00031
Plaintiff:
Steven Wayne Bonilla
Defendant:
Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thompson v. Dezarn et al
as 1:2024cv00002
Plaintiff:
Anthony Thompson
Defendant:
Officer Nicholas R. Dezarn P0002 doing business as Cincinnati Police Department, Officer William P. Goetz P0100 doing business as Cincinnati Police Department, Officer Myles J. ABT P0076 doing business as Cincinnati Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Alexander Hamilton v. Officer Nikki, et al
as 24-1004
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER D. HAMILTON
Defendant:
OFFICER NIKKI, A. GARDEBRED, Officer and OFFICER ABIGNEIL
Hamilton v. USA
as 5:2024cv00005
Petitioner:
Troy Daniel Hamilton
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Holmes v. Hamilton County, Ohio, Government
as 2:2023cv04266
Plaintiff:
Brian Isiah Holmes, Jr.
Defendant:
Hamilton County, Ohio, Government, Stacey DeGraffenreid and Joseph T. Deters
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.
