Cases 1 - 10 of 30
YARULLINA v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2024cv01022
Plaintiff:
ILMIYA YARULLINA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, DIRECTOR JAMES M. MURRAY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
James M. Murray v. Brian Birkholz
as 2:2023cv09749
Petitioner:
James M. Murray
Respondent:
Brian Birkholz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
James M. Murray v. Warden B. Birkholz
as 2:2023cv02139
Petitioner:
James M. Murray
Respondent:
Warden B. Birkholz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Murray v. United States
as 3:2022cv01618
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murray
Defendant:
United States and Federal Bureau of Prison
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv03663
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185 Employee Pension Plan
Murray v. Emery et al
as 9:2021cv01099
Plaintiff:
James O. Murray, III
Defendant:
Richard J. Emery, Matthew L. Sersen, NYSP and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Grishan v. Jones et al
as 6:2020cv06156
Defendant:
Members of US Congress, John Doe Director of DEA, Judge Barry Bryant and others
Plaintiff:
Richard Albert Grishan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Burchfield v. Jones et al
as 6:2020cv06150
Defendant:
Members of US Congress, John Doe Director of DEA, Judge Barry Bryant and others
Plaintiff:
Bradley C. Burchfield
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murray v. Akal et al
as 6:2020cv00792
Defendant:
J Dewy, Anthony Green, Louis Akal and others
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murray
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murray v. DeMarte et al
as 1:2018cv05807
Defendant:
Vincent DeMarte, Elizabeth Cronim and James Cowey
Plaintiff:
James O. Murray
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
