Cases 1 - 10 of 17
White v. Chronister et al
as 8:2024cv00993
Plaintiff:
David Lee White
Defendant:
Chad Chronister, Valdez M. Nelson Guzman, S. Colin Gill and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Parkin v. Naphcare, Inc.
as 8:2024cv00746
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Mitchell Parkin
Defendant:
Naphcare, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DeSean Baskin v. Sheriff, Fulton County Georgia, et al
as 23-14045
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DESEAN M. BASKIN
Defendant / Appellee:
SHERIFF, FULTON COUNTY GEORGIA, NAPHCARE, INC., HAYES-ARMSTRONG and others
DeSean Baskin v. Sheriff, Fulton County Georgia, et al
as 23-14043
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DESEAN M. BASKIN
Defendant / Appellee:
PATRICK LABOTT, HAYES-ARMSTRONG, SAINT-SIREN and others
Baskin v. Labott et al
as 1:2023cv03799
Plaintiff:
DeSean M. Baskin
Defendant:
Patrick Labott, Jane Doe, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cantrell Dunsmore v. Wells et al
as 8:2023cv01456
Plaintiff:
Denise Cantrell Dunsmore
Defendant:
Rick Wells, Kelly Zeitz, RN, Naphcare, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Parkin v. Naphcare, Inc. et al
as 8:2022cv02715
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Mitchell Parkin
Defendant:
Naphcare, Inc., Kurt Hoffman and Brian Meinberg
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jacobson v. NaphCare Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv03632
Plaintiff:
David Otto Jacobson
Defendant:
Naph Care Inc., Medical Director at Fulton County Jail, John Does (I-III) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Szekely v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2020cv24375
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons and Naphcare, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Mark Steven Szekely
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Szekely v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2020cv24376
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons and Naphcare, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Mark Steven Szekely
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.
