US District Court for the District of Connecticut Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 3,015
Ruldock v. Doe
as 3:2024cv00668
Plaintiff:
Brinsley Ruldock
Defendant:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniels et al v. United States of America et al
as 3:2024cv00660
Plaintiff:
Danny Dermill Daniels, Kariem Quadir Muhammud, James Jamuel Daniels and others
Defendant:
United States of America, Officer, City of Denver and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shand v. Burgos et al
as 3:2024cv00570
Plaintiff:
Christopher Shand
Defendant:
Ruben Burgos, Mark Bounaventure, Jamal Linen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rufus v. Pagan
as 3:2024cv00524
Plaintiff:
Antwan Rufus
Defendant:
Pagan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Radice v. Doe et al
as 3:2024cv00531
Plaintiff:
Radice
Defendant:
John Doe and Waterbury Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Holmes v. Semple
as 3:2024cv00573
Plaintiff:
William Holmes
Defendant:
Semple
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Coons v. Semple et al
as 3:2024cv00534
Plaintiff:
Steven Coons
Defendant:
Semple, Arnone, Cepelak and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wojcik v. Saas et al
as 3:2024cv00500
Plaintiff:
Thomas Joesph Wojcik
Defendant:
Robert Saas, Adam Leonetti, Israel Miranda and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mickens v. Connecticut Department of Corrections
as 3:2024cv00471
Plaintiff:
Reginald K Mickens
Defendant:
Connecticut Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cook v. Mastroianni et al
as 3:2024cv00426
Plaintiff:
Andrew Cook
Defendant:
James Mastroianni, Scott Meikle, Ryan Froehlich and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
