Cases 21 - 30 of 41
Lance Ealy v. Michael Barrett, et al
as 15-4358
Petitioner - Appellant:
LANCE EALY
Respondent - Appellee:
THE HONORABLE JUDGE MICHAEL R. BARRETT, UNITED STATES MARSHALS' OFFICE and SHERRIFF RICHARD JONES, Butler County Jail
BARRETT v. USA
as 1:2015cv00956
Petitioner:
MICHAEL ANTHONY BARRETT, JR.
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Ealy v. Jones et al
as 3:2015cv00308
Petitioner:
Lance Ealy
Defendant:
Richard K. Jones, Michael R. Barrett and Alex Sistla
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Pettus-Brown v. Cooper et al
as 1:2015cv00539
Plaintiff:
LaShawn R. Pettus-Brown
Defendant:
Ethna M. Cooper , Joseph T. Deters , Jim Neil and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Larry Ealy v. Susan Dlott, et al
as 15-2218
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LARRY E. EALY
Defendant - Appellee:
SUSAN DLOTT, Judge, in her professional and individual capacities, MICHAEL R. BARRETT, Judge, in his professional and individual capacities, JEREMY ROSE, in professional and individual capacities and others
EALY et al v. DLOTT et al
as 3:2015cv00169
Plaintiff:
LANCE Q. ELLIS EALY, Larry E Ealy and SCLG-LLC
Defendant:
SUSAN DLOTT, Michael R Barrett, JEREMY ROSE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
EALY et al v. DLOTT et al
as 1:2015cv00669
Defendant:
MICHAEL R. BARRETT, BRAD BIERMAN, SUSAN DLOTT and others
Plaintiff:
LANCE Q. ELLIS EALY, LARRY E. EALY and SCLG-LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Barrett v. AeroSat Corporation et al
as 1:2012cv00366
Defendant:
AeroSat Corporation, Sherwood Goldberg and David H. Rowe
Plaintiff:
Michael J. Barrett
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
In Re: Michael Barrett
as 11-2822
Petitioner:
Michael G. Barrett, AKA Mike Mike
Respondent:
United States of America
BARRETT v. USA
as 1:2011cv00310
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
MICHAEL ANTHONY BARRETT, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
