Cases 31 - 40 of 151
MILHOUSE v. LEVI et al
as 2:2009cv05363
Plaintiff:
KAREEM HASSAN MILHOUSE
Defendant:
TROY LEVI, JAMES GRIBBS, SCOTT DODRILL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
RICHARDSON v. LEVI
as 2:2009cv04917
Petitioner:
CEDRIC RICHARDSON
Respondent:
TROY LEVI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
AXFORD v. LEVI
as 2:2009cv04574
Petitioner:
MARK STEPHEN AXFORD
Respondent:
TROY LEVI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Kevin Brown v. Troy Levi
as 09-5323
Petitioner - Appellant:
Kevin Arthur Brown
Respondent - Appellee:
Troy Levi, Warden
BROWN v. LEVY et al
as 2:2009cv03857
Petitioner:
KEVIN BROWN
Respondent:
TROY LEVY and UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
BROWN v. LEVI et al
as 2:2009cv03177
Petitioner:
KEVIN A. BROWN
Respondent:
TROY LEVI, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
REYNOLDS v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 2:2009cv03096
Plaintiff:
GARY I. REYNOLDS, M.D.
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, ERIC L. HOLDER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
BROWN v. LEVI
as 1:2009cv01207
Petitioner:
KEVIN ARTHUR BROWN
Respondent:
TROY LEVI
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kareem Millhouse v. R. Arbasak, et al
as 09-2858
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KAREEM HASSAN MILLHOUSE
Defendant - Appellee:
R. ARBASAK, D. DEMPSEY, Lieutenant, JAMES GIBBS, S.I.S. LIEUTENANT and others
Kareem Millhouse v. R. Arbasak, et al
as 09-2709
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KAREEM HASSAN MILLHOUSE
Defendant - Appellee:
R. ARBASAK, D. DEMPSEY, Lieutenant, JAMES GIBBS, S.I.S. LIEUTENANT and others
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.
