Cases 11 - 20 of 511
Cook v. Clarke et al
as 7:2024cv00249
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Cook
Defendant:
Harold Clarke, Rick White, Unknown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brady Spicer v. Wilkes County North Carolina
as 24-6309
Plaintiff:
BRADY LEON SPICER
Defendant:
JONATHAN CALL, Lieutenant, ROBERT CLAYTON ANDERSON, DEREK ELLIS, Parole Office and others
Anderson v. McMillian et al
as 5:2024cv00081
Plaintiff:
Albert Anderson
Defendant:
FNU McMillian, Eric Dye, Jeffrey Duncan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cooke v. Department Of Corrections
as 3:2024cv00182
Plaintiff:
George A. Cooke
Defendant:
Department Of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Chambers v. Ishee et al
as 5:2024cv00074
Plaintiff:
Patrick J. Chambers
Defendant:
Todd Ishee, Kimberly D. Grande, Larry Williamson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Charles Cook v. Surry County Sheriff's Office
as 24-6194
Plaintiff:
CHARLES DAVID COOK
Defendant:
SURRY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, OFFICER GOINS, Sheriff, OFFICER ETHAN EVANS, Sheriff and others
COOK v. SURRY COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT et al
as 1:2024cv00162
Plaintiff:
CHARLES DAVID COOK
Defendant:
SURRY COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, OFFICER GOINS and ETHAN EVANS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Deans v. Clarke et al
as 7:2024cv00124
Plaintiff:
Donshea O'Niess Deans
Defendant:
Harold Clarke, Gregory L. Holloway, Warden Jeffery Artrip and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kenneth Newkirk v. K. Fleming
as 24-6063
Plaintiff:
KENNETH H. NEWKIRK
Defendant:
LIEUTENANT K. M. FLEMING, HAROLD C. CLARKE, Director, Dept. of Corrections, CHADWICK DOTSON, Director, Dept. of Corrections and others
Jerod Cook v. Associate Warden Cannon
as 24-6025
Plaintiff:
JEROD J. COOK
Defendant:
ASSOCIATE WARDEN CANNON
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.
