Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Edelkind v. Killian et al
as 1:2009cv05835
Petitioner:
Jamie Edelkind
Respondent:
Janice Killian, John Yost, Carolyn Sabol and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Yosef v. Killian et al
as 1:2008cv11086
Petitioner:
Ofer Yosef
Respondent:
Janice Killian, Michael MuCasey, Maureen Killion and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Smith v. Noakes et al
as 1:2008cv03028
Plaintiff:
John Smith
Defendant:
Michael Noakes, Robert Tassinari, Janice Killian and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Regis v. Killian et al
as 1:2007cv09756
Plaintiff:
Richard Regis
Defendant:
Janice Killian and Michael J. Garcia
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dicks v. Killian et al
as 1:2007cv09757
Plaintiff:
Eric Dicks
Defendant:
Janice Killian and Michael J. Garcia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Stuart v. Killian et al
as 1:2007cv08095
Petitioner:
Leroy Stuart
Respondent:
Janice Killian and Frank D. Whitney
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Stuart v. Killian et al
as 1:2007cv07670
Plaintiff:
Leroy Stuart
Defendant:
Janice Killian and Frank D. Whitney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lindsay v. Killian et al
as 1:2007cv07526
Plaintiff:
Eric Lindsay
Defendant:
Janice Killian, Michael R. Stiles, Esq. and United States Attorney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jackson v. Killian et al
as 1:2007cv05853
Plaintiff:
Thomas Priest Jackson
Defendant:
Janice Killian and Roslynn R. Mauskopf
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Jackson v. Apker et al
as 1:2007cv01324
Petitioner:
Thomas P. Jackson
Respondent:
Craig Apker, Roslyn R. Mauskopf and United States of America
Defendant:
Janice Killian
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
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.
