Cases 1 - 9 of 9
James Pesci v. Tim Budz, et al
as 18-10642
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES R. PESCI
Defendant - Appellee:
TIM BUDZ, individually and in his official capacity as former Facility Administrator of FCCC, THE GEO GROUP, INC., CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC and others
Richard Bradley v. GEO Care, LLC, et al
as 17-12482
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD ANGUS BRADLEY
Defendant - Appellee:
GEO CARE, LLC, GEO, INC. and JACQUES LAMOUR, Dr.
:
SERVICE
Brzozowski v. GEO Care, LLC et al
as 2:2016cv00826
Plaintiff:
Robert Brzozowski
Defendant:
GEO Care, LLC, Correctional Care Recovery Solutions, Inc., Donald Sawyer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jamaal Bilal v. GEO Care, LLC, et al
as 16-11722
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMAAL ALI BILAL, a.k.a. Superman, f.k.a. John L. Burton, a.k.a. Superman
Defendant - Appellee:
GEO CARE, LLC, GARZA, FCCC Custody Officer, individually and in his official capacity as Transport officer, JARVIS, FCCC Custody Officer, individually and in his official capacity as Transport Official and others
Keith Smith v. Jacques Lamour, et al
as 16-11438
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KEITH N. SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
JACQUES LAMOUR, Dr., PRICE and GEO CARE, LLC
Bradley v. Geo Care, LLC. et al
as 2:2014cv00627
Plaintiff:
Richard Angus Bradley
Defendant:
Geo Care, LLC., GEO, Inc., Timothy Budz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Grawbadger v. GEO Care, LLC et al
as 2:2014cv00432
Plaintiff:
William P. Grawbadger
Defendant:
GEO Care, LLC, Florida Department of Children and Families, Donald Sawyer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bilal v. Jarvis et al
as 2:2014cv00129
Plaintiff:
Jamal Ali Bilal
Defendant:
FNU Jarvis, FNU Garza, GEO Care, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Lamour et al
as 2:2014cv00090
Plaintiff:
Keith N. Smith
Defendant:
Jacques Lamour, Mr. Price and GEO Care, LLC
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.