Daniels v. Joyce et al

Defendant: Officer Joyce and Town Of Cicero
Plaintiff: Rayshun Daniels
Case Number: 1:2013cv03204
Filed: April 29, 2013
Court: Illinois Northern District Court
Office: Chicago Office
County: Cook
Presiding Judge: John W. Darrah
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Daniels v. Joyce et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Officer Joyce
Represented By: Cynthia Sara Grandfield
Represented By: Eric T Stach
Represented By: K. Austin Zimmer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Town Of Cicero
Represented By: Cynthia Sara Grandfield
Represented By: Eric T Stach
Represented By: K. Austin Zimmer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rayshun Daniels
Represented By: Richard J. Dvorak
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.