Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Cooley v. Nunley et al
as 2:2023cv00050
Petitioner:
Walter Andrew Cooley
Respondent:
William Nunley and Harvey Hawkins
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Fiorentino v. Wolfe et al
as 5:2022cv00304
Petitioner:
Henry Fiorentino
Respondent:
R.M. Wolfe and C. Nunley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Borelli v. Nunley
as 3:2022cv00203
Petitioner:
Henry Joseph Borelli and Mr. Henry Joseph Borelli
Respondent:
Mr. Nunley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Vargas v. Nunley
as 5:2022cv00298
Petitioner:
George Anotnio Vargas
Respondent:
Acting Warden Nunley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Borelli v. Nunley Warden
as 5:2022cv00254
Petitioner:
Mr. Henry Joseph Borelli
Respondent:
Mr. Nunley Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Jones v. Nunley
as 3:2022cv00184
Petitioner:
Eiko Jones
Respondent:
Acting Warden Nunley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Daniels et al v. Mingo County Commission et al
as 2:2022cv00247
Plaintiff:
Michelle Daniels, Robert Lee Daniels, Jr., Minor C. D. and others
Defendant:
Mingo County Commission, Mingo County Sheriff Joe Smith, Lt. E. Sherrill and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Nunley v. Western Regional Jail
as 3:2018cv01470
Defendant:
Western Regional Jail
Plaintiff:
Jeff Scott Nunley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bragg v. Sweeney et al
as 2:2017cv03693
Plaintiff:
Robert Bragg
Defendant:
Jonathan Sweeney, William Nunley and B. J. Holdren
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nunley et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2016cv01823
Plaintiff:
Mary Nunley and Louis Nunley
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc., Johnson & Johnson and Coloplast Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
