Maine Civil Rights Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 800
FEDEQ DV004 LLC et al v. CITY OF PORTLAND
as 2:2022cv00187
Plaintiff:
FEDEQ DV004 LLC and FEDEQ DV005 LLC
Defendant:
CITY OF PORTLAND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HARTLETT et al v. STATE OF MAINE et al
as 1:2022cv00185
Plaintiff:
BARBARA JEAN HARTLETT and ABRAHAM LEE STAPLES
Defendant:
STATE OF MAINE, JOANNE COOKSON, TAMIA KINGBURRY and others
Not Classified By Court:
MAINE ATTORNEY GENERAL - NON PRISONER IFP CASES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON v. CITY OF AUBURN MAINE et al
as 2:2022cv00171
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Defendant:
CITY OF AUBURN MAINE, AUBURN POLICE DEPT., JOHN DOES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON v. ROLFE
as 1:2022cv00161
Defendant:
JUSTIN S ROLFE and Crazy Train
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON v. DAYS INN et al
as 1:2022cv00164
Defendant:
STAFF SCHIVIN, DAYS INN, SAM and others
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON v. SOMERSET COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT et al
as 1:2022cv00172
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Defendant:
SOMERSET COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT, SHERIFF DALE LANCASTER, DET RONNIE BLODGETT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON v. BICKFORD
as 2:2022cv00165
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Defendant:
KEVIN BICKFORD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON v. HATIN
as 2:2022cv00166
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Defendant:
MICHAEL DREW HATIN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON v. OBERT
as 1:2022cv00168
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Defendant:
GORDON OBERT, JR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CROSSON et al v. OWNER OF PROPERTY TIM et al
as 2:2022cv00160
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY D CROSSON
Defendant:
OWNER OF PROPERTY TIM and 76 LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
