Cases 1 - 10 of 490
Alward v. Newell et al
as 1:2024cv00265
Plaintiff:
Matthew Keith Alward
Defendant:
Brian Newell, Warden Healey, Elkton FSL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Alward v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 1:2024cv00461
Plaintiff:
Matthew Keith Alward
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Cook v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al.
as 1:2024cv00727
Plaintiff:
William H. Cook, III
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Colette Peters, Warden David LeMaster and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Cook v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al.
as 1:2024cv00726
Plaintiff:
William H. Cook, III
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Colette Peters, Warden David LeMaster and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Martin v. Call et al
as 3:2024cv00237
Petitioner:
Donald Lynn Martin
Respondent:
Matt Call and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Jimmy Hindman v. John Doe, et al
as 24-5311
Plaintiff:
JIMMY DOYLE HINDMAN
Defendant:
JOHN DOE, Unknown Federal Prison Guard in Memphis, TN, ANGELA M. OWENS, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS and others
Davis v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 1:2024cv10669
Petitioner:
Diontae D. Davis
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Hernandez v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 7:2024cv00021
Petitioner:
William Hernandez
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Herrera v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 2:2024cv10544
Petitioner:
Clacy Watson Herrera
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Eric Rardin
Ast v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 7:2024cv00012
Petitioner:
John Raymond Ast
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
