Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Michael Moshoures v. City of North Myrtle Beach
as 24-1293
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MOSHOURES
Defendant:
CITY OF NORTH MYRTLE BEACH, MARILYN HATLEY, in her official capacity as Mayor of the City of North Myrtle Beach and DANA CROWELL, in her official capacity as Chief of the North Myrtle Beach Department of Public Safety
Moshoures v. North Myrtle Beach, City of et al
as 4:2022cv02123
Plaintiff:
Michael Moshoures
Defendant:
North Myrtle Beach, City of, Marilyn Hatley and Tommy Dennis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Shook et al v. City of Lincolnton, NC et al
as 5:2018cv00193
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Dean Shook and Jeremy Sean Shook
Defendant:
Ed Hatley, Tim Smith, City of Lincolnton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv00078
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv00048
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Hatley, et al v. Bowden, et al
as 5:2013cv00765
Plaintiff:
Anika Hatley and Amy Hatley
Defendant:
Bowden, City of Raleigh and City of Raleigh Police Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2012cv02502
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003
Steven Hatley et al v. Walter Tuffy et al
as 11-1019
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STEVEN HATLEY, MOHAMED ALI, II, BRIAN SHAFFER and others
Defendant - Appellee:
WALTER TUFFY, JOSEPH SMITH, DEBBIE OWENS and others
Hatley v. City of Charlotte
as 3:2010cv00423
Plaintiff:
Tammy Hatley
Defendant:
City of Charlotte
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LIPSCOMB v. HATLEY, et al
as 1:2010cv00450
Plaintiff:
STEVIE LIPSCOMB
Defendant:
DON HATLEY, DARREN WOODS, BILL GRIFFITH and others
Cause Of Action: 28 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.
