Cases 61 - 70 of 11,598
Meyers v. Louise et al
as 3:2024cv00699
Defendant:
Louise and J Thompson
Plaintiff:
Kevin J Meyers and Kevin Meyers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gates v. Doctors et al
as 3:2024cv00704
Defendant:
John Doe, Officers and Doctors
Plaintiff:
Sean D Gates and Sean Gates
Unknown:
WESTVILLE E-FILE(Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Evanoff v. Garrett P.D. et al
as 1:2024cv00348
Defendant:
Brylon, Skyler Castro, Garrett P.D. and others
Plaintiff:
Carl Ray Evanoff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Follette v. Warden et al
as 3:2024cv00696
Defendant:
John Doe 3, John Doe 1, Jane Doe 1 and others
Plaintiff:
Dustin Alan Follette
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hickman v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2024cv00697
Defendant:
Thompson, Manns, Eric J Holcomb and others
Unknown:
WESTVILLE E-FILE(Court Use Only)
Plaintiff:
Anthony S Hickman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hubbard v. Mallott et al
as 3:2024cv00690
Defendant:
James Watson and MacKenzie Mallott
Plaintiff:
Christian Hubbard
Unknown:
MIAMI E-FILE(Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Perry v. Warden
as 2:2024cv00293
Respondent:
Warden
Petitioner:
Tyrone Perry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Holly v. Warden
as 3:2024cv00698
Respondent:
Warden
Petitioner:
William Holly
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dixon v. LaPorte County Jail et al
as 3:2024cv00694
Defendant:
LaPorte County Jail, Cheryl and Al
Plaintiff:
Michael Dixon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dixon v. LaPorte County Jail et al
as 3:2024cv00695
Plaintiff:
Michael Alan Dixon and Michael Dixon
Defendant:
Smith and LaPorte County Jail
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.
