Cases 1 - 10 of 36
Fitch v. Garland et al
as 1:2022cv00402
Plaintiff:
Lamont Fitch
Defendant:
Merrick B. Garland, Christopher Wray, Director Michael Carvajal and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Terrance Henderson v. J. Harmon
as 22-6029
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TERRANCE ROBERT HENDERSON
Defendant / Appellee:
J. A. HARMON, Hearings Officer, Nottoway Correctional Center, CARL MANIS, Warden, Wallens State Prison and KAREN STAPLETON
Defendant:
W. R. HENSLEY, Hearings Officer, Wallens Ridge State Prison, DAVID ZOOK, Warden, Sussex I State Prison, T. LEABOUGH and others
Ray v. Feifer et al
as 5:2020cv01224
Defendant:
Officer FNU Feifer and W. R. Rusty Hierholzer
Plaintiff:
Naujee Laurent Ray
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hamze v. Patten et al
as 3:2016cv01443
Plaintiff:
Abdelaziz Bilal Hamze
Defendant:
John S. Patten, Davis, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
David Crawley v. George Hinkle
as 15-7511
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID EDWARD CRAWLEY
Defendant - Appellee:
GEORGE M. HINKLE, GREGORY HOLLOWAY, W. R. HENSLEY and others
PULLIAM v. STAFFORD et al
as 1:2015cv00769
Plaintiff:
SCOTTY RAY PULLIAM
Defendant:
W. R. STAFFORD, J. WILLIAMS, KEITH ROY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Burgos v. Fox et al
as 2:2014cv01952
Plaintiff:
Richard Manuel Burgos
Defendant:
K. Fox, Aisha F. Muhammad, R. Mitchell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rochester v. Tuesdale et al
as 6:2012cv02746
Plaintiff:
Julian E Rochester
Defendant:
Ms Tuesdale, Mr Ragland, Mr Dillard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Malcolm Muhammad v. C. Stapleton
as 12-6724
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MALCOLM MUHAMMAD
Defendant - Appellee:
C. STAPLETON, W. R. HENSLEY and RANDY MATHENA
Defendant:
M. STANFORD, B. RARIZEE, K. MASSEY and others
Berlan Dicey v. W. Harrison, et al
as 12-15606
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BERLAN LYNELL DICEY
Defendant - Appellee:
A. PFADT and W. R. HARRISON
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.
