Cases 1 - 10 of 13
JAMES v. B.O.P et al.
as 1:2022cv02806
Plaintiff:
CALVIN JAMES
Defendant:
B.O.P., US ATTORNEY GENERAL, U.S. CONGRESS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
QUAGLIN v. GARLAND et al
as 1:2022cv01154
Petitioner:
CHRISTOPHER JOSEPH QUAGLIN
Respondent:
US Attorney General MERRICK GARLAND, Superintendent NNRJ TED HULL, MERRICK B. GARLAND and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
BOLIN v. US ATTORNEY GENERAL
as 1:2022cv00714
Plaintiff:
PAUL C. BOLIN
Defendant:
US ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SAUNDERS et al v. FLOWERS-CONTI et al
as 1:2014cv00870
Plaintiff:
HENRY SAUNDERS, ALBERT RANIERI, JAMES WHITTED and others
Defendant:
JOY FLOWERS-CONTI, KEITH A. PESTO and W.D. PENNSYLVANIA ASSISTANT US ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timothy Guess v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 13-5047
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Timothy Wayne Guess
Defendant - Appellee:
Eric H. Holder, Jr., US Attorney General
Timothy Parrack v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 12-5249
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Timothy J. Parrack
Defendant - Appellee:
Eric H. Holder, Jr., US Attorney General
Tilman Partin v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 12-5214
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Tilman Rufus Partin
Defendant - Appellee:
Eric H. Holder, Jr., US Attorney General of Washington DC
Robert Heard v. US Attorney General
as 10-5154
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Robert Heard
Defendant - Appellee:
US Attorney General
Nathaniel Richardson v. William Suter, et al
as 10-5129
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Nathaniel J. Richardson
Defendant - Appellee:
William K. Suter, Clerk of Court, Sued in his Individual Capacities, S. Elliott, Case Analyst, Sued in his Individual Capacities, Sandy Spagnolo, Case Analyst, Sued in her Individual Capacities and others
HEARD v. US ATTORNEY GENERAL
as 1:2010cv00647
Plaintiff:
ROBERT HEARD
Defendant:
US ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
