Cases 21 - 30 of 87
Matthew Thompson v. John Long, et al
as 15-14676
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MATTHEW JOHN THOMPSON
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN LONG, AWP ASSISTANT WARDEN, DAWN SMITH, HSA MEDICAL SERVICE DIRECTOR, EBONY O. HARVEY, II SC and others
Devandal Thomas v. Prison Health Services, Inc., et al
as 15-14341
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DEVANDAL BERNARD THOMAS
Defendant - Appellee:
PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC., MARSHA NICHOLS, Correctional Nurse, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
PARKER v. KOSANOVICH et al
as 3:2015cv00376
Plaintiff:
OLLIE EDWARD PARKER, III
Defendant:
KOSANOVICH, RAINES, STOKES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WILSON v. HENRY et al.
as 5:2015cv00159
Plaintiff:
ARTHUR WILSON
Defendant:
MARK HENRY, RUMMEL and JANE DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ollie Parker, III v. Kosanovich, et al
as 15-12202
Plaintiff - Appellant:
OLLIE EDWARD PARKER, III
Defendant - Appellee:
KOSANOVICH, Officer, a.k.a. Psycho, RAINES, Sergeant, J. FERRO, Officer and others
THOMAS v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES INC et al.
as 3:2015cv00223
Plaintiff:
DEVANDAL BERNARD THOMAS
Defendant:
PRISON HEALTH SERVICES INC, MARSHA NICHOLS, JULIE JONES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hartley v. Jones et al
as 3:2015cv00609
Plaintiff:
Drew C Hartley
Defendant:
Julie L. Jones, Edwin Buss, Kenneth S Tucker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bobby Magwood v. Secretary, Florida Department, et al
as 15-10854
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BOBBY L. MAGWOOD
Defendant - Appellee:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, MARSHA NICHOLS, RICHARD COMERFORD and others
Dureco Brown v. W. Rummel, et al
as 14-15801
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DURECO K. BROWN
Defendant - Appellee:
W. D. RUMMEL, D. MCGOWAN and M. NICHOLS, ARNP
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2014cv00548
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
