Cases 21 - 30 of 85
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv05339
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Pennington v. Raoul
as 4:2023cv04120
Plaintiff:
Robert L Pennington, Jr
Defendant:
Kwame Raoul
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Avant v. Raoul et al
as 1:2023cv01245
Plaintiff:
Cordell Avant
Defendant:
Kwame Raoul, Rob Jeffreys, Craig Findley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Northern v. Dart et al
as 1:2023cv03131
Petitioner:
Shedrick Northern
Respondent:
Tom Dart and Kwame Raoul
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Timothy Bell v. Kwame Raoul, et al
as 23-1757
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY BELL
Defendant / Appellee:
KWAME RAOUL, Attorney General and GLENN J. ALEXANDER, Assistant Attorney General
Heather v. Brown et al
as 3:2023cv03130
Plaintiff:
Robert P Heather, Jr
Defendant:
James Brown, Brendon Kelly, Tracie Newton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Conway v. Pontiac Correctional Center et al
as 1:2023cv01044
Plaintiff:
Darryl Conway
Defendant:
Pontiac Correctional Center, Illinois Department of Corrections, Kwame Raoul and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Taylor v. Illinois et al
as 3:2022cv02837
Plaintiff:
Raphael Taylor
Defendant:
State of Illinois, District II Chicago Police Station, District II Chicago Circuit Court and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bell v. Raoul et al
as 1:2022cv06780
Plaintiff:
Timothy Bell
Defendant:
Kwame Raoul and Glenn J Alexander
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hannibal Eason v. Kwame Raoul, et al
as 22-3126
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HANNIBAL EASON
Defendant / Appellee:
KWAME RAOUL, OFFICE OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY GENERAL, KIMBERLY M. FOXX and others
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.
