Cases 1 - 10 of 58
WEINSCHENK v. UNITED STATES et al
as 1:2022cv01150
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WEINSCHENK
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA, ERIC HOLCOMB, SUZANNE CROUCH and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2333 Civil Remedies: Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991
Cody v. Daniels et al
as 3:2021cv00073
Plaintiff:
Contrell Deandre Cody
Defendant:
Mitch Daniels, Ron Neal and Eric Holcomb
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CODY v. DANIELS et al
as 1:2021cv00263
Plaintiff:
CONTRELL DEANDRE CODY
Defendant:
MITCH DANIELS, RON NEAL and ERIC HOLCOMB
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2018cv00090
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hoglund v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2017cv00824
Plaintiff:
Keith Hoglund
Defendant:
Indiana State of, Edgar D Whitcomb, Mitch Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CABLE v. ARAMARK et al
as 1:2017cv03959
Defendant:
AMERICAN CORRECTIONAL ASSOCIATION, ARAMARK, BOARD OF EDUCATION and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JAMES CABLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Schenke v. Griffith et al
as 4:2015cv00075
Plaintiff:
James K Schenke
Defendant:
Julie Griffith, Trent Klingerman, Julie Rosa and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Doe v. Daniels et al
as 2:2013cv00307
Plaintiff:
Dr Jon M Doe
Defendant:
Mitch Daniels, Mamon Powers, Howard Cohen and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729
James M. Sweeney, et al v. Mitch E. Daniels, Jr., et al
as 13-1264
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES M. SWEENEY, DAVID A. FAGAN, CHARLES SEVERS and others
Defendant - Appellee:
MITCH DANIELS, Governor of the State of Indiana, GREGORY ZOELLER, Attorney General of the State of Indiana and LORI TORRES, Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Labor
COFFEY v. STATE OF INDIANA et al
as 1:2013cv00117
Defendant:
ROGER BOOTH, PAUL BOWLING, MITCH DANIELS and others
Plaintiff:
PAULI COFFEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
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.
