Cases 171 - 180 of 909
Messer v. Langlade County Child Protective Services et al
as 1:2022cv00208
Plaintiff:
Luke C Messer
Defendant:
Langlade County Child Protective Services, Rylee Bricko, Ann Albrecht and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Alvarez v. Clark County et al
as 2:2022cv00261
Plaintiff:
Rafael Bernardo Alvarez
Defendant:
Clark County, Joseph Lombardo, Las Vegas Metrolpolitan Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2022cv00049
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12111
VAUGHN:DOUCE v. NEW JERSEY DIVISION CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY et al
as 3:2022cv00475
Plaintiff:
OLIVER VAUGHN:DOUCE
Defendant:
NEW JERSEY DIVISION CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY, MADELIN F. EINBINDER, KERI POPKIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CRAIG v. DENNIS et al
as 5:2022cv00049
Plaintiff:
KAREN GEORGETTE CRAIG
Defendant:
SARAH DENNIS, JONES COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, JANA WADELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00005
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Fraly v. Grand Traverse County Child Protective Service Employee's, et al
as 2:2021cv13048
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Nandawula v. Child Protective Services (CPS)
as 8:2020cv03733
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
DeeDee Hiett, et al v. Merced County Human Services A
as 21-71419
Petitioner:
DEEDEE HIETT and RAMON MAGDALENO
Respondent:
MERCED COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Child Protective Services (CPS)
Edwards v. Department of Human Services et al
as 1:2021cv01726
Plaintiff:
DeeJanea Edwards
Defendant:
Department of Human Services, Child Protective Services, Rebekah Scroggins and others
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.
