Cases 41 - 50 of 68
Mallett v. Wiley et al
as 1:2009cv02888
Plaintiff:
Dawane Mallett
Defendant:
Ron Wiley, Mark Collins and Harly Lappin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Preacher, et al v. Wiley, et al
as 09-1493
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LUKE PREACHER
Plaintiff:
DAVID BAXTER, AKA Richie Antonio Hall and DAWANE MALLETT
Defendant - Appellee:
RON WILEY, Warden ADX-Florence, B. A. BLEDSOE, Warden USP Marion, J. FOX, Associate Warden ADX-Florence and others
Akers v. Weinshienk, et al
as 09-1478
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MONTGOMERY CARL AKERS
Defendant - Appellee:
ZITA L. WEINSHIENK, District Director, BOYD N. BOLAND, ROBERT M. BLACKBURN and others
Akers v. Weinshienk, et al
as 09-1198
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MONTGOMERY CARL AKERS
Defendant - Appellee:
ZITA L. WEINSHIENK, District Director, RON WILEY, ROBERT BAUER and others
Collins v. Schwarzenegger
as 3:2009cv00891
Petitioner:
Mark Collins
Respondent:
A. Schwarzenegger
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Akers v. Weinshienk, et al
as 09-1115
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MONTGOMERY CARL AKERS
Defendant - Appellee:
ZITA L. WEINSHIENK, District Director, RON WILEY, ROBERT BAUER and others
Akers v. Weinshienk et al
as 1:2009cv00480
Plaintiff:
Montgomery Carl Akers
Defendant:
Zita L. Weinshienk, Ron Wiley, Robert Bauer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mark Collins v. Arnold Schwarzenegger
as 09-55198
Petitioner - Appellant:
MARK COLLINS
Respondent - Appellee:
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor of California
Mark Collins v. A. Schwarzenegger
as 2:2009cv00305
Plaintiff:
Mark Collins
Defendant:
A. Schwarzenegger
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Forma Pauperis Denial
Williams v. Manley et al
as 1:2009cv00056
Plaintiff:
Shawn P. Williams
Defendant:
John P. Manley, T. Beal, J. Cabel and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
