Cases 1 - 10 of 31
Kelly v. Solomon et al
as 3:2017cv00311
Plaintiff:
Willie T. Kelly, Jr.
Defendant:
George T. Solomon, R. D. Mitchell, Alfred William and others
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
Allen v. Perry et al
as 5:2016ct03113
Plaintiff:
Daniel L. Allen
Defendant:
Frank L. Perry, R. David Mitchell, Timothy J. McKoy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Turner v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety et al
as 3:2015cv00365
Plaintiff:
Theodore C. Turner
Defendant:
North Carolina Department of Public Safety, R. David Mitchell, Ken Beaver and others
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
MABE v. MITCHELL
as 1:2014cv01080
Petitioner:
MICHAEL W. MABE
Respondent:
R. DAVID MITCHELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Givens v. Aaron et al
as 3:2014cv00233
Plaintiff:
Leonard A. Givens
Defendant:
David Aaron, R. David Mitchell, John Reynolds and others
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
Bond v. State of North Carolina et al
as 5:2013hc02103
Petitioner:
Charles Phillips Bond
Respondent:
State of North Carolina, J.M. Freeman, Valerie M. Asbell and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wray v. Mitchell et al
as 1:2010cv00298
Plaintiff:
John Lewis Wray, Jr.
Defendant:
R. David Mitchell, Beverly Perdue, Roy Cooper and others
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
Moorehead v. Keller et al
as 1:2010cv00131
Plaintiff:
Jackie Emmitt Moorehead
Defendant:
Alvin W. Keller, Jr., Robert C. Lewis and R. David Mitchell
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
GALLIMORE v. MITCHELL
as 1:2009cv00809
Petitioner:
CARL WAYNE GALLIMORE
Respondent:
R. DAVID MITCHELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cedeno v. Mitchell
as 5:2009hc02105
Petitioner:
Jorge Enrique Cedeno
Respondent:
R. David Mitchell
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.
