Cases 1 - 10 of 30
RUFFIN v. MARSHALL
as 4:2026cv00399
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL RUFFIN
Defendant:
GWEN MARSHALL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ruffin El v. U.S. District of Northern Indiana, et al
as 5:2026cv12555
Plaintiff:
Michael Ruffin El
Defendant:
U.S. District of Northern Indiana, U.S. District of Southern Ohio, United States and others
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Ruffin El v. United States et al
as 5:2026cv12507
Plaintiff:
Michael Ruffin El
Defendant:
United States, Ports of Indiana and Lake County Board of Commissioners
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Addison et al v. CorrectHealth LLC et al
as 4:2026cv00087
Plaintiff:
Emily Addison and Michael Ruffin, Sr.
Defendant:
CorrectHealth LLC, Artyom V. Vlasenka, Travis Sheffield and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
RUFFIN EL v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2025cv03483
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL RUFFIN EL
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Michael RuffinIn re: Michael Ruffin
as 23-12810
Petitioner:
In re: MICHAEL RUFFIN
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF GEORGIA
Ruffin El v. Parent
as 2:2023cv00160
Plaintiff:
Michael Ruffin El and Michael Ruffin Jr
Defendant:
Bruce Parent, Lake County and McColly Real Estate
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
RUFFIN v. DIXON
as 5:2023cv00053
Petitioner:
MICHAEL RUFFIN
Respondent:
MARK INCH and RICKY DIXON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Certification of Judgment 22-1424 et al v. United States
as 2:2022mc51608
In Re:
Certification of Judgment 22-1424
Plaintiff:
Michael Ruffin-El
Defendant:
United States
Ruffin-El v. United States et al
as 1:2022cv01424
Plaintiff:
Michael Ruffin-El
Defendant:
United States, Ports of Indiana and Lake County Board of Commissioners
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
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.
