Cases 1 - 10 of 15
HAYNES v. S.C.I. HOUTZDALE, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2023cv00165
Plaintiff:
DONALD R. HAYNES
Defendant:
S.C.I. HOUTZDALE, DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, DR. NAJI MUHAMMAD, TERRI SECHRENGOST and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
HAYNES v. THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
as 2:2023cv02848
Plaintiff:
DONALD R. HAYNES
Defendant:
THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Reaves v. Davidson et al
as 4:2022cv01142
Plaintiff:
Kathy J. Reaves and Kathy Juanita Reaves
Defendant:
William H. Davidson, II, Davidson, Wren & DeMasters, P.A., South Carolina Div. of Motor Vehicles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Smith v. Coleman
as 3:2020cv05319
Plaintiff:
John Garrett Smith
Defendant:
J Coleman
Respondent:
G Jones and R Haynes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jackson v. Berkey et al
as 3:2019cv06101
Plaintiff:
Kyntrel Trevyone Jackson and Sinister Daevayasnaham God
Defendant:
Rebecca A Citrak, Ronna Cole, William P Aurich and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Clifton R. Haynes Jr. v. Kathleen Allison et al
as 5:2019cv01276
Defendant:
Does and Kathleen Allison
Plaintiff:
Clifton R. Haynes, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ball v. Haynes
as 3:2019cv05135
Petitioner:
Edmund F Ball, III
Respondent:
R Haynes and Ron Haynes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Michael Haynes v. Oregon B.O.P.P.P.S., et al
as 17-35496
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL R. HAYNES
Respondent - Appellee:
OREGON BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST PRISON SUPERVISION, COLETTE PETERS, Board Member and JERI TAYLOR, Superintendent
Haynes v. USA
as 8:2016cv00163
Petitioner:
Quincy R. Haynes
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Haynes v. Tucker
as 2:2013cv14271
Plaintiff:
Cal R. Haynes
Defendant:
Kenneth Tucker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
