Cases 31 - 40 of 170
Butler v. Correctional Medical Service, et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2012cv00630
Plaintiff:
Eugene Butler
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Service and Dr. Lopez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shapley v. Thomas et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2012cv00618
Plaintiff:
Shaun Glovis Shapley
Defendant:
Kim Tobias Thomas, Kenneth Jones, Sandra Giles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carter v. Correctional Medical Services et al (INMATE 1)(CONSENT)
as 2:2012cv00608
Plaintiff:
Michael Eugene Carter
Defendant:
Michele Sagers-Copeland , DyJerlynn Lampley-Copeland and Correctional Medical Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv00569
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Davis v. Correctional Medical Services Inc
as 2:2012cv02103
Plaintiff:
Glennie Dee Davis
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Services Inc
Miscellaneou:
staff attorney 1
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Correctional Medical Services Inc et al
as 4:2012cv01927
Plaintiff:
Glennie Dee Davis
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Services Inc and Ruth Naglich
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Correctional Medical Services, Inc. (INMATE 2)
as 2:2012cv00422
Plaintiff:
Glennie Dee Davis
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv00340
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Perry vs. Culliver, et al
as 1:2012cv00231
Plaintiff:
Wayne D. Perry
Defendant:
Grantt Culliver , Alabama Department of Corrections , Donny Myers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timothy Mixon v. Corrections Medical Service, et al
as 12-11478
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TIMOTHY L. MIXON
Defendant - Appellee:
CORRECTIONS MEDICAL SERVICE, WARDEN, RUTH NAGLICH 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.
