Cases 1 - 10 of 28
MEYERS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2023cv20443
Plaintiff:
DAVID MYERS and DAVID MEYERS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF NEW JERSEY and JUDGE CLAIRE C. CECCHI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BASKERVILLE v. EGLI et al
as 2:2022cv01025
Petitioner:
EBN BASKERVILLE
Respondent:
KENN EGLI, US PROBATION, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
SANCHEZ SANTOS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2021cv04975
Plaintiff:
LUIS SANCHEZ SANTOS
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CFG MEDICAL SERVICES, UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERV. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
KENLEY v. THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF NEW JERSEY (CAMDEN)
as 1:2019cv21287
Petitioner:
JESSE KENLEY
Respondent:
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF NEW JERSEY (CAMDEN)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv00006
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv12196
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv12197
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv12197
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv12196
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BLACKBURN v. CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2017cv12180
Petitioner:
STEPHEN-PATRICK BLACKBURN
Respondent:
CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS , KIM MARTIN and others
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.
