Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Clayborne v. Schmidt et al
as 2:2022cv00133
Plaintiff:
Jack A Clayborne
Defendant:
Dale Schmidt, Sgt Polsin, Sgt Kuehl and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Clayborne v. Godiwalla et al
as 2:2022cv00095
Plaintiff:
Jack A Clayborne
Defendant:
Doctor Godiwalla, Ann Christina Stetcher Boryczka, Debra Knisbeck and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Campbell v. Schmidt et al
as 2:2020cv01357
Defendant:
Chad Haase, Deputy Ryan Schwartz, Ellis and others
Plaintiff:
Gary B Campbell, Jr
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Polsin v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP
as 4:2015cv00158
Plaintiff:
Donna M. Polsin
Defendant:
Wal-Mart Stores East, LP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Camp #244593 v. Unknown Party et al
as 1:2012cv00306
Plaintiff:
Harry Camp #244593
Defendant:
Unknown Party, Tony Tague, Mary Berghuis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Edward Carlton v. Jennifer Granholm, et al
as 12-1041
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD NATHANIEL CARLTON
Defendant - Appellee:
JENNIFER GRANHOLM, former Governor, FREDERIDCK PYTALL, Canton Township Police Department, BOOTH, Sergeant, Wayne County Sheriff Department and others
Carlton v. Granholm et al
as 2:2011cv15621
Plaintiff:
Edward Carlton
Defendant:
Jennifer Granholm, Frederick Pytall, Booth and others
Hussain v. Gonzales et al
as 1:2007cv00268
Petitioner:
Mohammad Azam Hussain, Mohammad Azam Hussain and Mohammad Azam Hussain
Respondent:
Alberto R Gonzales, Alberto R Gonzales, Deborah Achim and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Hussain v. Gonzales et al
as 2:2007cv00268
Petitioner:
Mohammad Azam Hussain, Mohammad Azam Hussain and Mohammad Azam Hussain
Respondent:
Alberto R Gonzales, Deborah Achim, Thomas Polsin and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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.
