Cases 21 - 30 of 43
Samuel Jackson v. Marla Magana
as 16-6031
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SAMUEL R. JACKSON
Defendant - Appellee:
NURSE MARLA MAGANA, DR. ROBERT OWENS and DR. ELIZABETH BYRD
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT DENNIS DANIELS
Bray v. Warner et al
as 3:2015cv05339
Plaintiff:
Robert Owen Bray
Defendant:
Bernard Warner, Pat Glebe, Thomas L'heureux and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bryant v. Owens et al
as 5:2015cv00602
Plaintiff:
Jermaine De'shun Bryant
Defendant:
Robert Owens, Christopher Stafford and Kris Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
John McLean v. Marvin Casino
as 14-7469
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN MCLEAN
Defendant - Appellee:
MARVIN D. CASINO, ROBERT OWENS, PAULA SMITH and others
Marshall v. WY Department of Corrections, et al
as 14-8033
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT OWEN MARSHALL, III
Defendant - Appellee:
WYOMING DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC./CORIZON HEALTH, ROBERT O. LAMPERT, Wyoming Department of Corrections Director, individually and inis official capacity and others
Hanson v. Owens
as 5:2014ct03078
Plaintiff:
Rodger Hanson
Defendant:
Robert Owens
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BURGESS v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2014cv00172
Petitioner:
ROBERT OWEN BURGESS, JR.
Respondent:
JOHN KERESTES, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson v. Magana et al
as 5:2013ct03295
Plaintiff:
Samuel R. Jackson
Defendant:
Marla Magana, Robert Owens and Dennis Daniels
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Owens v. United States of America
as 2:2013cv14405
Plaintiff:
Robert Owens
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
McLean v. Casino et al
as 5:2013ct03065
Plaintiff:
John McLean
Defendant:
Frank Casino, Robert Owens, Paula Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
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.
