Cases 21 - 30 of 54
CRUMP v. JOHN DOE 1 et al
as 1:2022cv00325
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY CRUMP
Defendant:
JOHN DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, JOHN DOE 3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MUSGROVE v. BRIDGES, et al
as 1:2022cv00311
Plaintiff:
SAQUAN S. MUSGROVE
Defendant:
TRAVIS BRIDGES and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RICE v. AUTEN et al
as 1:2022cv00153
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL DANTE RICE
Defendant:
KEVIN AUTEN, JOHN DOE #2, K-9 OFFICER JOHN DOE #3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MARTIN v. SEABOLT et al
as 1:2021cv00906
Plaintiff:
KA'LAH (KALAH) MARTIN
Defendant:
GREGORY SEABOLT, STEVEN W MYERS, TRAVIS SHORT and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
LILES v. DOES
as 1:2021cv00904
Plaintiff:
JAMES DAVID LILES, JR.
Defendant:
JOHN DOES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WATSON v. HARMON et al
as 1:2021cv00877
Plaintiff:
TRAVIS L. WATSON
Defendant:
LISA HARMON, JANE DOE, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCALLISTER v. FORSYTH COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2021cv00786
Plaintiff:
ANTON THURMAN MCALLISTER
Defendant:
FORSYTH COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, BOBBY F. KIMBROUGH, ROCKY JOYNER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOHNSON EL et al v. NC DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY et al
as 1:2021cv00277
Defendant:
NC DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, FNU Williams, KENNETH E. LASSITER and others
Plaintiff:
MONTAVIUS A. JOHNSON-EL, Shirley Ana Holden and MONTAVIUS A. JOHNSON EL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SIMMONS v. CRISCO et al
as 1:2021cv00102
Defendant:
DETENTION OFFICER, JEFFREY A. CRISCO, JOHN DOE #1 and others
Plaintiff:
CATHY ANN SIMMONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICE v. SHERIFF OF ROWAN COUNTY et al
as 1:2020cv00932
Defendant:
CARRIE WALTERS, LT. MACKEY, DISTRICT COURT JUDGE RANDOLPH and others
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL RICE
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.
