Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Charles Dixon v. James Conway, et al
as 26-3663
Plaintiff:
CHARLES EDMUND DIXON
Defendant:
JUDGE JAMES W. CONWAY, PROSECUTOR JAMES JOEL SITTERLY, DEVIN JOHN WILLIAMS and others
Conway v. Davis
as 5:2026cv01835
Petitioner:
James William Conway
Respondent:
Kelly Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Dixon v. Conway, et al.
as 3:2026cv00208
Plaintiff:
Charles Edmund Dixon
Defendant:
Judge James W. Conway, Prosecutor James Joel Sitterly, Devin John Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Benedict v. Wetherille et al
as 0:2025cv02446
Plaintiff:
Christine Benedict
Defendant:
Kevin J. Wetherille, Courtney Sebo Savica, Allen Uhlir and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Davis v. Conway et al
as 3:2022cv00550
Plaintiff:
Hasan M. Davis
Defendant:
James P. Conway, Heidrich Hunter, Cheryl Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Allen v. Naphcare et al
as 3:2022cv00046
Plaintiff:
Ronald Lee Allen
Defendant:
Naphcare, Sheriff Balaam, James P. Conway and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
In re: Bennie Adams, et al v. Richard Michael DeWine, et al
as 21-3330
Plaintiff / Appellee:
DOUGLAS L. COLEY, DENNY OBERMILLER, JASON ROBB and others
Intervenor / Appellee:
VON CLARK DAVIS, CALVIN MCKELTON, ASHFORD THOMPSON and others
Defendant / Appellant:
ANNETTE CHAMBERS-SMITH, Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, EDWIN C. VOORHIES, JR., Managing Director of Operations, ODRC, MIKE DEWINE, Governor, State of Ohio and others
Plaintiff:
BENNIE ADAMS
Not Classified By Court:
In re: OHIO EXECUTION PROTOCOL LITIGATION
CONWAY v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv11369
Plaintiff:
JAMES A CONWAY
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
