Cases 1 - 10 of 10
DAVIS v. I.D.O.C. et al
as 2:2019cv00340
Defendant:
D. RUSSEL, JUSTIN T. SHROYER, RICHARD BROWN and others
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM C. DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DAVIS v. BERRYHILL
as 1:2019cv00681
Defendant:
NANCY A. BERRYHILL
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM J. DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
DAVIS v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2018cv02985
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL LLC and WILLIAM COOK EUROPE APS
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM J DAVIS and WILLIAM J. DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DAVIS v. COMMUNITY HOWARD REGIONAL HEALTH, INC. et al
as 1:2017cv03803
Defendant:
COMMUNITY HEALTH NETWORK, INC. and COMMUNITY HOWARD REGIONAL HEALTH, INC.
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM H. DAVIS, JR.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
DAVIS v. BROWN et al
as 2:2017cv00344
Respondent:
RICHARD BROWN and INDIANA DOC
Petitioner:
WILLIAM C. DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DAVIS v. KANE
as 2:2017cv00152
Defendant:
BUREAU OF PRISONS and THOMAS R. KANE
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM C. DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
DAVIS v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2013cv00185
Petitioner:
WILLIAM C. DAVIS
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DAVIS v. WARDEN, WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 2:2012cv00102
Petitioner:
WILLIAM C. DAVIS
Respondent:
WARDEN, WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DAVIS v. WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
as 2:2011cv00257
Petitioner:
WILLIAM C. DAVIS
Respondent:
WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DAVIS v. WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACIILITY
as 2:2011cv00254
Petitioner:
WILLIAM C. DAVIS
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT and WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACIILITY
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.
