Cases 21 - 30 of 101
Tennyson v. CoreCivic et al
as 1:2018cv00680
Plaintiff:
Audrey L. Tennyson
Defendant:
CoreCivic , Michael Miller , Michael (I) Miller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carrico v. Miller et al.
as 1:2018cv00490
Petitioner:
Gary W. Carrico
Respondent:
Michael Miller and Attorney General for the State of Colorado, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Miller et al v. Equifax Inc. et al
as 4:2017cv00569
Plaintiff:
Michael Miller and Daniel Kittrell
Defendant:
Equifax Inc. and Equifax Information Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Rochau v. Miller et al
as 1:2017cv02368
Petitioner:
Robert J Rochau
Respondent:
Michael Miller and Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Phipps v. Miller
as 1:2017cv01833
Petitioner:
Randy Phipps
Respondent:
Michael Miller
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Tennyson v. Miller et al
as 1:2017cv01572
Plaintiff:
Audrey L. Tennyson
Defendant:
Michael Miller, Michael (I) Miller, Malinda McMillian and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sandoval v. Raemisch, et al
as 17-1161
Petitioner - Appellant:
WILLIAM FRANK SANDOVAL
Respondent - Appellee:
RICK RAEMISCH, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Corrections, MICHAEL MILLER, Warden, Crowley Correctional Facility and CYNTHIA H. COFFMAN, Attorney General, State of Colorado
Aurelio et al v. Correctional Corporation of America et al
as 1:2017cv01073
Plaintiff:
Nicholas J. Aurelio and Allen De Atley
Defendant:
Correctional Corporation of America, CoreCivic, Michael Miller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carrico v. Miller
as 1:2017cv00430
Petitioner:
Gary Carrico
Respondent:
Michael Miller
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Bashaw v. Miller et al
as 1:2016cv02362
Petitioner:
William V Bashaw
Respondent:
Michael Miller and Attorney General for the State of Colorado, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
