Cases 1 - 10 of 10
JONES v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS et al
as 1:2018cv01586
Respondent:
UNITED STATES SOUTHERN DISTRICT, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS and BUREAU OF PRISONS
Petitioner:
JAMES BERNARD JONES, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00348
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv00928
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
WALSH et al v. JONES et al
as 1:2013cv00844
Plaintiff:
RORY M. WALSH and S.J.W.
Defendant:
JAMES L. JONES, MARK J. SULLIVAN, JANET A. NAPOLITANO and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
JONES v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
as 1:2007cv00852
Plaintiff:
JAMES STEPHEN JONES
Defendant:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv01075
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
JONES v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2009cv00849
Plaintiff:
JAMES EARL JONES
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv00146
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
JONES v. MUKASEY et al
as 1:2008cv01493
Petitioner:
JAMES STEPHEN JONES
Respondent:
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY and JOHN C. TRUONG
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
JONES v. GONZALES et al
as 1:2007cv01916
Plaintiff:
JAMES S. JONES
Defendant:
ALBERTO GONZALES and UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
