Cases 11 - 20 of 100
BURMAN v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS DIRECTOR et al
as 3:2019cv00123
Plaintiff:
ALLAH BURMAN
Defendant:
KOPERA MEDICAL STAFF, ERIC BRADLEY, IAN CONNORS and others
Petitioner:
DONALD N. DAVEY and TIMICO C. JOHNSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Wright v. Perdue et al
as 3:2018cv01595
Defendant:
Unit Manager R. Scandel, Warden R. Perdue, Assistant Warden R. Miller and others
Plaintiff:
Mark Wright
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
CONCEPCION v. ORTIZ et al
as 1:2018cv09919
Plaintiff:
ALBERTO CONCEPCION
Defendant:
D. ORTIZ, BRINSON, J. DIXON and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Concepcion v. Ortiz et al
as 3:2018cv01103
Plaintiff:
Alberto Concepcion
Defendant:
D. Ortiz, Brinson, J. Dixon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BURMAN v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS DIRECTOR et al
as 1:2018cv01098
Plaintiff:
ALLAH BURMAN
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS DIRECTOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, NORMAN WEIDLICH and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Cecil Davis v. USA, et al
as 18-30399
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CECIL MCDONALD DAVIS
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, M. D. CARVAJAL, Warden, USP Pollock and others
Randy Shaw v. Correctional Officer Brelan, et al
as 17-30699
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RANDY TRACY SHAW
Defendant - Appellee:
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BRELAN, LIEUTENANT COGGINS, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER CAIN and others
Skinner v. Meyer, et al
as 1:2017cv00100
Plaintiff:
Shakir Malik Skinner
Defendant:
Christopher Meyer, Joe Coakley and M. D. Carvajal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Carlos Woods v. Jackie Fowner, et al
as 17-30375
Petitioner - Appellant:
CARLOS WOODS
Respondent - Appellee:
JACKIE FOWNER, P. ODHIAMBO, M. D. CARVAJAL and others
Estes v. Werlich, et al
as 17-1155
Petitioner - Appellant:
JONATHAN N. ESTES
Respondent - Appellee:
T. G. WERLICH, M. D. CARVAJAL, RICK RAEMISCH 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.
