Cases 1 - 10 of 40
Edward Hannah v. State of South Carolina
as 23-6820
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD MARKFABIAN HANNAH
Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, BERKELEY COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT SOLICITOR'S OFFICE and others
Hannah v. State of South Carolina et al
as 2:2023cv01487
Plaintiff:
Edward Markfabian Hannah
Defendant:
State of South Carolina, Berkeley County Sheriff Department, Ninth Judicial Circuit Solicitor's Office and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Marshall v. Farley et al
as 7:2021cv00089
Defendant:
Richard Farley and Office of the Commonwealth Attorney of Albemarle
Plaintiff:
William Frank Marshall, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Farley v. Clarke et al
as 7:2018cv00643
Defendant:
Harold Clarke, Officer John Doe, Kevin McCoy and others
Plaintiff:
Darrell Farley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Farley v. Clarke et al
as 7:2018cv00634
Defendant:
Officer Doe #5, Lt. Booker, V. Hunt and others
Plaintiff:
Darrell Farley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gold v. South Carolina, The State of et al
as 5:2018cv02996
Defendant:
Nicholas McCarley, South Carolina, The State of, Theodore Lupton and others
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Gold
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Truman v. Frye et al
as 1:2018cv00963
Defendant:
Mr. Mcdougal, Mr. Farley, Mr. Frye and others
Plaintiff:
Cecil Guy Truman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mullins v. Dr. Farley
as 1:2018cv00454
Plaintiff:
Doyle Mullins
Defendant:
Dr. Farley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gold v. Hasty et al
as 5:2018cv00242
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Gold
Defendant:
Kenneth Hasty, Theodore N. Lupton, Mitchell E. Farley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anyanwu v. Farley et al
as 1:2017cv03529
Plaintiff:
Emmanuel Onyemaec Anyanwu
Defendant:
Mr. Farley, Great Plains Correctional Facility and GEO Group , Inc.
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.
