Cases 81 - 90 of 171
Reiblich v. Moss et al
as 8:2016cv01484
Plaintiff:
Mitchell W. Reiblich
Defendant:
Dana Moss, Andrew R. Van Sickles, Charles E. Roberts and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Graham v. State of Florida
as 0:2016cv60572
Plaintiff:
Roosevelt Graham
Defendant:
State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Wilborn v. Unnamed Defendant
as 1:2015cv04153
Plaintiff:
James Wilborn
Defendant:
DeKalb County Jail, Jeffrey Mann, Graham and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodriguez v. State of Georgia et al
as 1:2015cv04114
Plaintiff:
Hjalmar Rodriguez, Jr
Defendant:
State of Georgia, County of Chattooga, Georgia and Khristina J. Graham
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodriguez v. State of Georgia et al
as 4:2015cv00226
Plaintiff:
Hjalmar Rodriguez, Jr
Defendant:
State of Georgia, County of Chattooga, Georgia and Khristina J. Graham
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rice v. Elrod et al
as 1:2015cv03759
Plaintiff:
Marshall Rice
Defendant:
Tonya Elrod, Greg Chastain, Graham Arrowood and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ingraham v. Komar et al
as 8:2015cv01871
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Lionel Ingraham
Defendant:
Dennis Komar, William Burgass, Kelly W. Graham and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Graham v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 5:2015cv00390
Plaintiff:
Steven Anthony Graham
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, United States of America, William Bechtold and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Jones v. Clayton Judicial Circuit et al
as 1:2015cv02609
Plaintiff:
David Joseph Jones
Defendant:
Clayton Judicial Circuit, Tracy Graham Lawson, Teresa M. Stolze and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ashe v. Clayton County District Attorney Office et al
as 1:2015cv02502
Plaintiff:
Corey C. Ashe
Defendant:
Clayton County District Attorney Office, Tracy Graham Lawson, Jane LNU and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
