Cases 1 - 10 of 38
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2025cv09173
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2025cv09174
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Heid, et al., v. Warden, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, et al.
as 1:2025cv00107
Plaintiff:
James Damron
Defendant:
Warden, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, Lieutenant Aderholt, Leslee Caradine and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Marquez Perry v. Warden, Warren Correctional, et al
as 23-3517
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARQUEZ B. PERRY
Defendant / Appellee:
CORRECTIONS OFFICER DANIEL BURKE, SERGEANT JAMIE EWEN, UMC RODNEY MCINTOSH and others
Defendant:
WARDEN, WARREN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Husband v. Chamber-Smith et al
as 1:2023cv00170
Plaintiff:
Louis R. Husband
Defendant:
Annette Chamber-Smith and Warden Wanza Jackson-Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Allen v. Jackson-Mitchell
as 3:2023cv00394
Petitioner:
Jamaree Allen
Respondent:
Warden Wanza Jackson-Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
In re: Dennis Pointer
as 23-3124
Petitioner:
In re: DENNIS WAYNE POINTER
Respondent:
WANZA JACKSON-MITCHELL
Henderson v. Jackson-Mitchell
as 4:2022cv01851
Petitioner:
Jordan S. Henderson
Respondent:
Warden Wanza Jackson-Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Todd King, Sr. v. Wanza Jackson-Mitchell
as 22-3786
Petitioner / Appellant:
TODD A. KING, SR.
Respondent / Appellee:
WANZA JACKSON-MITCHELL, Warden
Christopher SmithIn re: Christopher Smith
as 22-3295
Petitioner:
In re: CHRISTOPHER J. SMITH
Respondent:
WANZA JACKSON-MITCHELL, Warden
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.
