Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Woodruff v. Cargle et al (INMATE 4)
as 2:2023cv00033
Plaintiff:
John Michael Woodruff
Defendant:
Camelia Cargle and Steven T Marshall
Respondent:
Warden Joseph Headley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Woodruff v. Cargle et al (INMATE 4)
as 2:2022cv00622
Plaintiff:
John Michael Woodruff
Defendant:
Camelia Cargle and Steven T. Marshall
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WOODRUFF v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv33012
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WOODRUFF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2019cv00217
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2019cv00216
Not Classified By Court:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Travis Dean v. State of Nevada, et al
as 17-17094
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TRAVIS REMAUL DEAN
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE OF NEVADA, ROBERT LEGRAND, Warden, KIRK WIDMAR and others
Dean v. State of Nevada et al
as 3:2016cv00753
Defendant:
David Carpenter, Starlin Gentry, Larry Hegge and others
Plaintiff:
Travis Remaul Dean
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
John Woodruff v. Kayla Crockett, et al
as 16-16845
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOHN MICHAEL WOODRUFF
Respondent - Appellee:
KAYLA CROCKETT and COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
Woodruff v. Woodruff
as 7:2016cv00184
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WOODRUFF
Defendant:
ROBYN WOODRUFF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
WOODRUFF v. CROCKETT
as 7:2016cv00008
Petitioner:
JOHN MICHAEL WOODRUFF
Respondent:
KAYLA CROCKETT
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.
