Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Dida v. Hvarre
as 1:2024cv01193
Plaintiff:
Mohamed Dida
Respondent:
Kimberly Hvarre
Not Yet Classified:
Habeas Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Baldwin v. Crow et al
as 1:2024cv03626
Petitioner:
Derrick Anthony Angelos Baldwin
Respondent:
Christel Crow, Kimberly Hvarre and Attorney General of the State of Illinois
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dida v. Hvarre
as 3:2024cv00835
Plaintiff:
Mohamed Abduba Dida
Defendant:
Kimberly Hvarre
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dida v. Hvarre
as 3:2024cv00714
Plaintiff:
Muhamed Abduba Dida and Mohamed Abduba Dida
Defendant:
Kimberly Hvarre and Rosa
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dida v. Hvarre
as 3:2024cv00468
Petitioner:
Mohamed Dida
Respondent:
Kimberly Hvarre
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GREEN v. WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES INC., a Pennsylvania corp et al
as 3:2024cv00447
Plaintiff:
LESTER GREEN
Defendant:
WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES INC., a Pennsylvania corp, DR. DENNIS LARSON, WARDEN Kimberly Hvarre and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Dida v. Hvarre
as 3:2024cv00283
Plaintiff:
Michael Abduba Dida and Mohamed Abduba Dida
Defendant:
Kimberly Hvarre
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dida v. Hvarre
![Final or Interim Order We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case](/bundles/docketsbrowsing/images/gavel.png)
as 3:2024cv00238
Plaintiff:
Mohamed Abduba Dida
Defendant:
Kimberly Hvarre
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dida v. Hvarre
![Final or Interim Order We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case](/bundles/docketsbrowsing/images/gavel.png)
as 3:2024cv00131
Plaintiff:
Mohamed Dida
Defendant:
Kimberly Hvarre
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.