Cases 1 - 6 of 6
David Meyers v. Chief Judge
as 22-7211
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
Defendant / Appellee:
CHIEF JUDGE, United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina - Raleigh, NC Division, JAMES N. ISHIDA, Circuit Executive, TERRENCE W. BOYLE, U.S. District Judge and others
David Meyers v. Chief U.S. District Judge
as 22-6593
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
Defendant / Appellee:
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE, U.S. DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA, U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and others
David Meyers v. U. S. District Court for the Middle District of NC
as 22-6595
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DAVID MEYERS
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA, CLERK JOHN S. BRUBAKER, THE CHIEF UNITED STATES JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA and others
EDWARDS v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
as 1:2012cv00419
Plaintiff:
STEVEN E. EDWARDS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
FRANKLIN-EL v. THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
as 1:2010cv00084
Petitioner:
STANLEY EUGENE FRANKLIN-EL
Respondent:
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CHAVIS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2009cv01522
Petitioner:
HERBERT CHAVIS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA and UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
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.
