North Carolina Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 6,201
Powell v. Brannon et al
as 5:2025ct03086
Plaintiff:
Christ Alonza Powell
Defendant:
E. Brannon, S. Murphy, Wilmington Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harding v. State of North Carolina et al
as 5:2025ct03085
Plaintiff:
Keith Harding
Defendant:
State of North Carolina and Wake County District Court
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Scott v. Rushing et al
as 5:2025cv00058
Plaintiff:
Dustin Gene Scott
Defendant:
Devane Rushing and Noah A. Watson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TYLER v. FERGUSON et al
as 1:2025cv00288
Plaintiff:
XAVAR TYLER
Defendant:
DANNY FERGUSON and STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Jacksonville Police Department
as 5:2025ct03083
Plaintiff:
Matthew Jones
Defendant:
Jacksonville Police Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Smith v. Boyle
as 5:2025ct03074
Plaintiff:
David L. Smith
Defendant:
U.S. Judge Terrence W. Boyle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Foye v. Obershea et al
as 5:2025ct03077
Plaintiff:
Maurkice Foye
Defendant:
James Obershea, Detective Matthew Lassiter, First Sergeant Lewis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Moore v. Brockington et al
as 3:2025cv00246
Plaintiff:
David Leroy Moore
Defendant:
Terreance Brockington, Eric Flowers and Monica Becton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Greer v. Doe et al
as 3:2025cv00250
Plaintiff:
Christopher S. Greer
Defendant:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRIS v. NADOLSKI et al
as 1:2025cv00273
Plaintiff:
PATRICK O'NEAL HARRIS
Defendant:
PATRICK T. NADOLSKI, JULIE COAKLEY, CLERK VIRGINIA A. SULLIVAN 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.
