Cases 1 - 10 of 39
Szentkiralyi v. Aviles et al
as 1:2017cv00949
Petitioner:
Krisztina R. Szentkiralyi
Respondent:
Oscar Aviles, Raymond Simonse, Jeh Johnson and others
Defendant:
Loretta Lynch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2015cv00137
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2015cv00040
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2015cv00013
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Mark Lyttle v. James Hayes, et al
as 12-12871
Plaintiff - Appellee:
MARK DANIEL LYTTLE
Defendant - Appellant:
JAMES T. HAYES, Director, Office of Detention and Removal, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, RAYMOND SIMONSE, DAVID COLLADO, Enforcement Officer, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others
Lyttle v. The United States of America et al
as 1:2010cv03302
Plaintiff:
Mark Daniel Lyttle
Defendant:
The United States of America, Eric H. Holder, Jr., Janet Napolitano and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nick Mends v. Michael Chertoff, et al
as 10-10796
Petitioner - Appellant:
NICK MENDS
Respondent - Appellee:
MICHAEL CHERTOFF, MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, RAYMOND SIMONSE and others
Enobong v. Sizer et al
as 1:2009cv01429
Petitioner:
Ebong Enobong
Respondent:
Frank Sizer, Frank Sizer, Janate Napolitano and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Habeas Corpus:INS
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv00581
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Habeas Corpus:INS
Mends v. Chertoff et al
as 4:2009cv00333
Petitioner:
Nick Mends
Respondent:
Michael Chertoff, Michael Mukasey, Raymond Simonse and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
