Cases 41 - 50 of 62
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv00671
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv01178
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
SMITH v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, et al
as 1:2012cv00038
Plaintiff:
KEVIN MICHAEL SMITH
Defendant:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, CITY OF CONCORD, NC , CABARRUS COUNTY and others
Movant:
NC DEPT. SECRETARY OF STATE
Cause Of Action: 48 U.S.C. § 1985
Michael Sindram v. Douglas Robelen
as 11-2005
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM
Defendant - Appellee:
DOUGLAS B. ROBELEN, State Actor, GERALD BRUCE LEE, PHYLLIS T. WALTON and others
Defendant:
PATRICIA L. HARRINGTON
Cox v. U.S. Marshals Service Headquarters
as 1:2011cv02659
Plaintiff:
TiJon Cox
Defendant:
U.S. Marshals Service Headquarters
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2271
Nimashaun v. U.S. Marshal Service
as 2:2011cv00138
Plaintiff:
Deborah Nimashaun
Defendant:
U.S. Marshal Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Sindram v. Douglas Robelen
as 11-1093
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM
Defendant - Appellee:
DOUGLAS B. ROBELEN, State Actor, GERALD BRUCE LEE, PHYLLIS T. WALTON and others
Defendant:
PATRICIA L. HARRINGTON
Michael Sindram v. Patricia Harrington
as 10-2293
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM
Defendant - Appellee:
PATRICIA L. HARRINGTON, DOUGLAS B. ROBELEN, State Actor, GERALD BRUCE LEE and others
Michael Sindram v. Patricia Harrington
as 10-2073
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM
Defendant - Appellee:
PATRICIA L. HARRINGTON, DOUGLAS B. ROBELEN, State Actor, GERALD BRUCE LEE and others
Williams v. Director of U.S. Marshals Service
as 3:2010cv00390
Plaintiff:
Gary Buterra Williams
Defendant:
Director of U.S. Marshals Service
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.