Cases 21 - 30 of 59
FREEMAN v. MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION COMMISSARY et al
as 3:2017cv02713
Plaintiff:
DONELL FREEMAN
Defendant:
MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION COMMISSARY and KEEFE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Travis Cavanaugh v. Warden Monmouth County Correct
as 17-1511
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TRAVIS ANDREW CAVANAUGH
Defendant - Appellee:
WARDEN MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
SMITH v. RICCARDI et al
as 3:2016cv08260
Plaintiff:
KEITH A. SMITH
Defendant:
JOHN A. RICCARDI, PETER E. WARSHAW, VERNON L. MCGOWAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FUSSELL v. CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 1:2016cv08155
Plaintiff:
SHAKERA FUSSELL
Defendant:
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION and SALEM CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MAYHUE v. MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION et al
as 3:2016cv00705
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY MAYHUE
Defendant:
MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, NORMAN SCHACK and JUSTIN SCHULTZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CASRELL v. NADROWSKI et al
as 3:2015cv05877
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM DAYSON CASRELL
Defendant:
BARRY NADROWSKI, VILLACOBA and MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
STATHUM v. NADROWSKI et al
as 3:2015cv05502
Plaintiff:
TODD STATHUM, SR.
Defendant:
BARRY NADROWSKI, VILLACOBA and MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DEER v. MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
as 3:2015cv03924
Plaintiff:
GLENROY A. DEER
Defendant:
MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-1786
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 15-1785
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
