US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Cases 1 - 10 of 71,214
MCMULLIN v. WARDEN
as 2:2024cv00184
Petitioner:
SHAWN MCMULLIN
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JONES v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv00829
Plaintiff:
KRISTIAN JONES
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
SITZMAN v. COOK INCORPORATED
as 1:2024cv07103
Defendant:
COOK MEDICAL LLC, COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL INCORPORATED and others
Plaintiff:
JANET SITZMAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00827
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act
HOPKINS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2024cv00824
Petitioner:
ANTOINE HOPKINS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
CALLANTINE v. WARDEN
as 2:2024cv00183
Petitioner:
ZACHARY W. CALLANTINE
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WISE v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv00823
Plaintiff:
TIFFANY N. WISE
Defendant:
MARTIN O'MALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
BLUE v. INDIANA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2024cv00181
Plaintiff:
JEREMY BLUE
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, FRANK VANIHEL, DENNIS REGGLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00822
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
BARHAM INVESTMENTS, LLC v. CITY OF CARMEL
as 1:2024cv00819
Plaintiff:
BARHAM INVESTMENTS, LLC
Defendant:
INDIANA CITY OF CARMEL
Cause Of Action: 43 U.S.C. § 945 Compensation for Land Condemnation
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.
