Cases 61 - 70 of 183
Phillips v. Bentley et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2011cv00977
Plaintiff:
Ronald L. Phillips
Defendant:
Robert Bentley , Kim Tobias Thomas , Leeposey Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Griffin v. Bentley et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2011cv00976
Plaintiff:
Kenneth R. Griffin
Defendant:
Robert Bentley , Kim Tobias Thomas , Leeposey Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Caldwell v. Bentley et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2011cv00975
Plaintiff:
Paul D. Caldwell
Defendant:
Robert Bentley , Kim Tobias Thomas , Leeposey Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davidson v. Correctional Medical Service (CMS) et al
as 6:2011cv03929
Plaintiff:
Eric C. Davidson
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Service (CMS), Debbie Hunt, Sophilia Clemmons and others
Miscellaneou:
staff attorney 2
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Barley v. Bentley et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2011cv00974
Plaintiff:
Daniel M. Barley
Defendant:
Robert Bentley , Kim Tobias Thomas , Leeposey Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kilpatrick v. Correctional Medical Services Inc
as 7:2011cv03662
Plaintiff:
Paul James Kilpatrick
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Services Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Taylor v. Kramer et al
as 3:2011cv00985
Plaintiff:
Kit Robert Taylor
Defendant:
Lance Daniel Kramer, Eric Twisdale, Frank Ennist and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kilpatrick v. Correctional Medical Services, Inc. (INMATE 1)
as 2:2011cv00791
Plaintiff:
Paul James Kilpatrick
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Horsman v. Bentley et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2011cv00769
Plaintiff:
William W. Horsman, III
Defendant:
Robert Bentley , Kim Tobias Thomas , Leeposey Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Matthews v. White et al
as 1:2011cv00514
Plaintiff:
Scott Matthews
Defendant:
Warden White, Deputy Warden Mayers and Correctional Medical Services
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.
