Cases 1 - 10 of 15
RAMOS v. UNKNOWN SPECIAL AGENT et al
as 1:2023cv00423
Plaintiff:
JULIO A. RAMOS
Defendant:
UNKNOWN SPECIAL AGENT and UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DALE v. UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
as 1:2020cv01248
Plaintiff:
CURTIS LEE DALE
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv00150
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
GARZA v. UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
as 1:2016cv00985
Plaintiff:
JORGE LUIS GARZA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Montez Freeman v. DEA
as 16-2498
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MONTEZ FREEMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
Jeremy Williams v. DEA
as 14-4112
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JEREMY WILLIAMS
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
FREEMAN v. UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
as 2:2014cv01106
Plaintiff:
MONTEZ FREEMAN
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Jose Padilla, Jr. v. U.S. Government, et al
as 13-15201
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSE ULYSSES PADILLA, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. GOVERNMENT, UNITED STATES DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Angus v. Mulverhill et al
as 9:2013cv00017
Petitioner:
Thomas Raymond Angus
Respondent:
Kevin Mulverhill, Franklin County Sheriff Department, State of New York and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Angus v. Mulverhill et al
as 1:2012cv08093
Petitioner:
Thomas Raymond Angus
Respondent:
Kevin Mulverhill, Franklin County Sheriff Department, State of New York and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
