Cases 1 - 10 of 43
Starnes v. MCF Rush City Warden
as 0:2024cv04169
Respondent:
MCF Rush City Warden
Petitioner:
Matthew Starnes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Critt v. Warden, MCF - Rush City
as 0:2024cv03828
Respondent:
Warden, MCF - Rush City
Petitioner:
Justin Marshall Critt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Minnesota Department of Corrections et al
as 0:2024cv02880
Defendant:
Gregory LeKatz, Kenneth Peterson, Minnesota Department of Corrections and others
Plaintiff:
Jamal Lindsey Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rushing v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2023cv03290
Plaintiff:
James Rushing
Defendant:
3M Company and Arizant Healthcare, Inc.
Canada v. State of Minnesota et al
as 0:2023cv02704
Plaintiff:
Shawn Canada
Defendant:
State of Minnesota, Paul Schnell, Andrew Karlsen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Allen et al v. 3M Company
as 0:2023cv02634
Plaintiff:
Zackerie Allen, Nicholas Amatuzzo, Edwin Among and others
Defendant:
3M Company
Ware v. Warden, MCF Rush City
as 0:2023cv01918
Petitioner:
Marion Q Ware
Respondent:
Warden, MCF Rush City
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Yaritz v. Underwriter of Rush City/Moose Lake et al
as 0:2023cv00049
Plaintiff:
Harold Yaritz
Defendant:
Underwriter of Rush City/Moose Lake, Paul Schnell, Michelle Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rushing v. Walgreen Co.
as 0:2022cv01357
Plaintiff:
Sandra Jean Rushing
Defendant:
Walgreen Co.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Mondor v. MCF-Rush City Nursing Staff et al
as 0:2022cv01002
Plaintiff:
David Michael Mondor
Defendant:
MCF-Rush City Nursing Staff and Wendy Anglo
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner 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.
