Cases 71 - 80 of 367
JONES v. BUTTS
as 1:2018cv01319
Respondent:
KEITH BUTTS
Petitioner:
CHARLES JONES
Miscellaneou:
PENDLETON CF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HATTON v. BUTTS
as 1:2018cv01015
Respondent:
KEITH BUTTS
Petitioner:
TIMOTHY N. HATTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LATHAM v. NEW CASTLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 1:2018cv01010
Respondent:
KEITH BUTTS and NEW CASTLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Petitioner:
LARRY EUGENE LATHAM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PERRY v. BUTTS
as 1:2018cv00869
Defendant:
KEITH BUTTS
Plaintiff:
JASON SETH PERRY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BUNNELL v. BUTTS et al
as 1:2018cv00772
Plaintiff:
RODERICK BUNNELL
Defendant:
KEITH BUTTS, GIBSON and JENNY GIBSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HENLEY v. KNIGHT et al
as 1:2018cv00736
Defendant:
KEITH BUTTS, WENDY KNIGHT, THE SACRED SPIRITUAL ADVISOR and others
Plaintiff:
TONY HENLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RILEY v. STATE OF INDIANA et al
as 1:2018cv00536
Defendant:
KEITH BUTTS, ADAM DEMING, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION (PAROLE) and others
Plaintiff:
CLINTON RILEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GARLAND v. GEO GROUP et al
as 1:2018cv00428
Defendant:
ARAMARK, KEITH BUTTS, CORIZON INC. and others
Plaintiff:
KENNETH GARLAND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CHENOWETH v. BUTTS
as 1:2018cv00372
Respondent:
KEITH BUTTS
Petitioner:
JAMES K. CHENOWETH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ANKH EL v. BUTTS
as 1:2018cv00325
Petitioner:
MENES ANKH EL
Respondent:
KEITH BUTTS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
