Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Roland Davis v. Warden Ohio State Penitentiary
as 22-3978
Petitioner / Appellant:
ROLAND DAVIS
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN, OHIO STATE PENITENTIARY
In re: Bennie Adams, et al v. Richard Michael DeWine, et al
as 21-3330
Plaintiff / Appellee:
DOUGLAS L. COLEY, DENNY OBERMILLER, JASON ROBB and others
Intervenor / Appellee:
VON CLARK DAVIS, CALVIN MCKELTON, ASHFORD THOMPSON and others
Defendant / Appellant:
ANNETTE CHAMBERS-SMITH, Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, EDWIN C. VOORHIES, JR., Managing Director of Operations, ODRC, MIKE DEWINE, Governor, State of Ohio and others
Plaintiff:
BENNIE ADAMS
Not Classified By Court:
In re: OHIO EXECUTION PROTOCOL LITIGATION
DAVIS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv36966
Plaintiff:
ROLAND DAVIS
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Davis v. Strong
as 7:2019cv00073
Plaintiff:
Roland Davis
Defendant:
Darren Strong
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Colvin
as 4:2016cv03356
Plaintiff:
Roland Davis
Defendant:
Carolyn W Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 206
Davis v. Hall, et al
as 3:2016cv02263
Plaintiff:
Roland Davis
Defendant:
Daron Hall and Austin Bodie
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Angelo Fears, et al v. John Kasich, et al
as 16-3149
:
In re: OHIO EXECUTION PROTOCOL LITIGATION
Petitioner - Appellant:
ANGELO FEARS, RICHARD BAYS, ALVA E. CAMPBELL, JR. and others
Respondent - Appellee:
JOHN KASICH, Governor, State of Ohio, GARY C. MOHR, Director, ODRC, DONALD MORGAN, Warden, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility and others
Davis v. Hill et al
as 3:2015cv00936
Plaintiff:
Roland Davis
Defendant:
Samantha Hill, L.T.P. Denton, Daron Hall and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv02227
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
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.
