Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Dijon Dixon v. Eric Erwin, et al
as 23-5377
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DIJON T. DIXON
Defendant / Appellee:
ERIC A. ERWIN, Assistant Warden, UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY AT BIG SANDY, HECTOR JOYNER, Warden and others
Cauz v. LeFever
as 1:2023cv00126
Petitioner:
Javier Capote Cauz
Respondent:
Department of Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement and M. M. LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Cauz v. LeFever
as 1:2023cv00087
Petitioner:
Javier Capote Cauz
Respondent:
M. M. LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Castellan v. LeFever
as 1:2023cv00029
Petitioner:
Ivan Lopez Castellan
Respondent:
Acting Warden M. LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Vega v. LeFever
as 1:2023cv00030
Petitioner:
Jonathan Vega
Respondent:
Acting Warden M. LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Lara v. LeFever
as 1:2022cv00588
Petitioner:
Alexander Lara
Respondent:
Warden M. LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Garcia v. LeFever
as 1:2022cv00590
Petitioner:
David Perez Garcia
Respondent:
Warden M. LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Gomez v. LeFever
as 1:2022cv00587
Petitioner:
Jonathan Barrera Gomez
Respondent:
Acting Warden M. LeFever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Stout v. Prison Medical Providers et al
as 7:2021cv00407
Plaintiff:
Deborah Stout
Defendant:
Prison Medical Providers, Mr. Targonski, Mr. Douglas Weiss, O.D. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dixon v. USP Big Sandy et al
as 7:2021cv00026
Defendant:
A. Carter, J. Price, M. Lefever and others
Plaintiff:
Dijon T. Dixon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
