Cases 31 - 40 of 92
Allen Atkins v. Christian Gauderer, et al
as 23-1275
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALLEN ATKINS, aka Allen Aikens
Defendant / Appellee:
CHRISTIAN ERNEST GAUDERER, Mental Health Professional, sued in his/her individual capacity, HEIDI E. WASHINGTON, MDOC Director, sued in her official capacity, DAVID DAWDY, Mental Health Services Director, sued in his official capacity and others
Tamplin #712955 v. Corrigan
as 2:2023cv00038
Petitioner:
Jesse Stepeneldevon Tamplin #712955
Respondent:
James Corrigan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Miles #237011 v. Surety et al
as 2:2023cv00040
Plaintiff:
Kushawn S. Miles #237011
Defendant:
Unknown Surety, Michigan Department of Corrections, Unknown Simpson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jaime Montoya-Sancen v. James Corrigan
as 23-1150
Petitioner / Appellant:
JAIME MONTOYA-SANCEN
Respondent:
JAMES CORRIGAN
Evans v. Corrigan
as 1:2023cv10303
Petitioner:
Marquis Terrell-Lamar Evans
Respondent:
James Corrigan and J. Corrigan
Rodger Nesto, Jr. v. James Corrigan
as 23-1081
Petitioner / Appellant:
RODGER A. NESTO, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
JAMES CORRIGAN, Warden
Allen Atkins v. Russell Savoie, et al
as 23-1046
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALLEN ATKINS, aka Allen Aikens
Defendant / Appellee:
CORRECTION OFFICER RUSSELL SAVOIE, sued in his individual capacity, WARDEN CONNIE HORTON, Warden, sued in her individual capacity, ACTING WARDEN JAMES CORRIGAN, sued in his individual capacity and others
Ortiz #569152 v. Corrigan
as 2:2022cv00238
Petitioner:
Vicente Rodriguez Ortiz #569152, II
Respondent:
James Corrigan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tyrone Bell v. Heidi Washington, et al
as 22-2132
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TYRONE ANTHONY BELL
Defendant / Appellee:
HEIDI E. WASHINGTON, ROBERT NAPEL, CONNIE HORTON and others
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.
