Civil Rights Cases filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Cases 1 - 10 of 139
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1270
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Interested Party: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1458
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
John Doe, et al v. City of Boston, et al
as 24-1419
Plaintiff: JOHN DOE, JANE DOE and JAMES DOE
Defendant: BOSTON, MA, PAUL EVANS, individually, ROBERT DUNFORD, individually and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1180
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1181
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1074
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Doe v. Spears, et al
as 24-1037
Plaintiff: JOHN DOE, Father and Next Friend of Minors A, B, and C
Defendant: LINDA S. SPEARS, Commissioner of Massachusetts Department of Children, as a State Employee and Individually, PATRICIA KELLY, as a State Employee and Individually and JUDITH EDWARDS, as a State Employee and Individually
Doe v. Volokh We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 22-1525
Plaintiff / Appellee: JOHN DOE
Intervenor: EUGENE VOLOKH
Defendant: NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE and LISBON, NH
Amicus Curiae: ASSOCIATED PRESS, BOSTON GLOBE MEDIA PARTNERS, LLC, CALIFORNIANS AWARE and others
Harper v. Werfel, et al
as 23-1565
Plaintiff / Appellant: JAMES HARPER
Defendant / Appellee: INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, JOHN DOE 1-10 and DANIEL I. WERFEL, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service
MacDonald v. Brighton Police Chief, et al
as 23-1595
Plaintiff / Appellant: KINLEY MACDONALD
Defendant / Appellee: BRIGHTON POLICE CHIEF, BRIGHTON POLICE OFFICERS, 1-25 John Does, BRIGHTON SUPERVISING OFFICER, John Does and others

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.


Why Is My Information Online?