Cases 1 - 10 of 18
FIELDS v. ORTIZ et al
as 2:2014cv00248
Petitioner:
ANTHONY KEVIN FIELDS
Respondent:
DAVID ORTIZ and ISAAC FULWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
FIELDS v. ORTIZ et al
as 2:2013cv06421
Petitioner:
ANTHONY KEVIN FIELDS
Respondent:
DAVID ORTIZ and ISAAC FULWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
BENNETT v. REILLY et al
as 3:2012cv00041
Petitioner:
DENNIS BENNETT
Respondent:
JAMES F. REILLY, JR. , CRANSTON J. MITCHELL , PATRICIA K. CUSHWA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Phillips v. Holder et al
as 3:2011cv01336
Petitioner:
Charles A Phillips
Respondent:
Eric Holder , Isaac Fulwood and B.A. Bledsoe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Bailey v. Martinez et al
as 3:2011cv00461
Petitioner:
Ari Bailey
Respondent:
R Martinez , Isaac Fulwood, Jr. , Cranston J. Mitchell and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
HILL v. FULWOOD et al
as 2:2010cv04056
Petitioner:
GEORGE VANN HILL
Respondent:
ISAAC FULWOOD and TROY LEVI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
v. Fulwood et al
as 3:2009cv01930
Petitioner:
Ronald Cambrel
Respondent:
Isaac Fulwood and Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Carter v. Reilly et al
as 3:2009cv01628
Plaintiff:
Arnold Carter
Defendant:
Edward F. Reilly, Jr., Cranston J. Mitchell, Deborah A. Spagnoli and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
BENNETT v. REILLY et al
as 2:2009cv01663
Petitioner:
DENNIS BENNETT
Respondent:
JAMES F. REILLY, JR., CRANSTON J. MITCHELL, PATRICIA K. CUSHWA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
DUFF v. APKER et al
as 3:2009cv00672
Petitioner:
Michael Duff
Respondent:
Craig Apker, Edward F. Reilly, Jr., Cranston J. Mitchell and others
Defendant:
Edward F. Reilly, Jr., Cranston J. Mitchell, Patricia K. Cushwa and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
