Cases 1 - 10 of 11
RONDEAU et al v. REAGLE et al
as 1:2023cv01749
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER RONDEAU, BRADY TURNER, CORY GRAY and others
Defendant:
DENNIS REAGLE, MAGGIE BRYANT, CENTURION HEALTH OF INDIANA, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
IMO 2020 Attorney Mass Suspension
as 3:2020mc00017
In Re:
Mark Arnold Werling, John Christopher Havill, Steven Stoy Crone and others
Davis v. Warden
as 3:2020cv00632
Respondent:
Warden
Petitioner:
Michael Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
DAVIS v. KNIGHT
as 1:2020cv01876
Respondent:
WENDY KNIGHT
Petitioner:
MICHAEL DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS, NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES, AND/OR FAILURE TO SUBMIT IOLTA CERTIFICATION
as 1:2017mc00040
Respondent:
MANISH SHAILESHKUMAR ANTANI, JONATHAN REECE ARMSTRONG, ROBERT LEE ARTHUR and others
Plaintiff:
VICTORIA ANN DEAK
In Re:
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS, NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES, AND/OR FAILURE TO SUBMIT IOLTA CERTIFICATION
Defendant:
CASEY COLE KANNENBERG
Davis v. Superintendent
as 3:2015cv00505
Petitioner:
Michael Davis
Respondent:
Superintendent
Miscellaneous_party:
WESTVILLE E-FILE(Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis v. Superintendent
as 2:2015cv00016
Petitioner:
Michael Davis
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Davis v. Superintendent
as 2:2014cv00391
Petitioner:
Michael Davis
Respondent:
Superintendent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv00262
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
JACKSON v. WHEELERS TOW CO LLC et al
as 1:2012cv00304
Defendant:
MICHAEL DAVIS, MATTHEW E ELY, MARIA D GRANGER and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT L JACKSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
