Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Glen Spivey v. Leonard Schiofman, et al
as 23-12091
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GLEN DALE SPIVEY
Defendant / Appellee:
LEONARD SCHIOFMAN, ISAAC MOORE, C. E. RICHARDSON and others
SPIVEY v. SCHIOFMAN et al
as 4:2022cv00018
Plaintiff:
GLEN DALE SPIVEY
Defendant:
LEONARD SCHIOFMAN, ISAAC MOORE, C E RICHARDSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Spivey v. Schlofman et al
as 3:2021cv00530
Defendant:
Denis A. Vilchez, Centurion Medical Services, Inc., Corizon Medical Services, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Glen Dale Spivey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SPIVEY v. SCHLOFMAN et al
as 4:2020cv00095
Defendant:
PAGE A SMITH, LEONARD SCHLOFMAN, ISAAC MOORE and others
Plaintiff:
GLEN DALE SPIVEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas Brennan v. Kim Thomas, et al
as 18-12309
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS G. BRENNAN
Defendant - Appellee:
KIM TOBIAS THOMAS, CARTER F. DAVENPORT, JOSEPH H. HEADLEY and others
Miller v. Dunn et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2018cv00529
Plaintiff:
Daniel Miller
Defendant:
Jefferson S. Dunn, John Crow, Cynthia Fredricks and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Abbott v. Corizon Medical Services Inc. et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2017cv00465
Plaintiff:
James Abbott
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services Inc., Dr. Saddiq, Jeff Sanders and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bales v. Corizon Medical Services Inc. et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2016cv00714
Plaintiff:
David H. Bales
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services Inc., Jean Darbouze, Jefferson S. Dunn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Yoder v. Corizon Medical Services Inc
as 1:2015cv02213
Plaintiff:
Jacob Adam Yoder
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SWINSON v. CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES INC
as 3:2015cv00487
Plaintiff:
EDDIE L SWINSON
Defendant:
CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES INC
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.