Cases 21 - 30 of 24,996
McCoy v. Stirling et al
as 8:2024cv03558
Plaintiff:
Darrell F McCoy, Jr
Defendant:
Bryan Stirling, Dennis Patterson, Willie Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Wojcik v. Medical Adm, MacDougall CI et al
as 0:2024cv03559
Plaintiff:
James Allen Wojcik
Defendant:
Henry, Rick, Medical Adm, MacDougall CI and Warden Martell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Everson v. Roberts
as 5:2024cv03556
Plaintiff:
Veronica Everson
Defendant:
James Roberts
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Baird v. Sharp et al
as 0:2024cv03549
Plaintiff:
Dewight Sheldon Baird
Defendant:
Warden Kenneth Sharp, Sergeant T. Session and John Doe 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Brooks v. Jackson
as 1:2024cv03511
Petitioner:
Emonte Brooks
Respondent:
Shane Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Campos v. Jackson
as 8:2024cv03510
Petitioner:
Filiberto Campos
Respondent:
Warden Shane Jackson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Donovan v. Stirling et al
as 8:2024cv03512
Plaintiff:
Michael Patrick Donovan
Defendant:
Bryan P. Stirling, Major FNU Gregg, A W Fredricks and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Gaillard v. Hill-Finklea Detention Center et al
as 2:2024cv03496
Plaintiff:
Percy Devon Gaillard
Defendant:
Hill-Finklea Detention Center, Major Anthony Fyall, Cpt. Archie Beau and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
McClellan v. Stirling
as 9:2024cv03458
Plaintiff:
James Anderson McClellan
Defendant:
Brian Stirling
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Tabata v. City of Hanahan et al
as 2:2024cv03448
Plaintiff:
Luxolo Tabata
Defendant:
City of Hanahan, Mildred Rowell and Private First Class Goss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Breach of Contract- Insurance
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.
