Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Timothy King-El v. Matthew W. Wilson
as 22-6242
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY D. KING-EL
Defendant / Appellee:
MATTHEW WILSON, formerly identified as FNU Wilson and SAINT T. TAPP, Unit Manager Assistant, in his Individual and Official Capacities
Defendant:
JEFFERY E. JAMES, Unit Manager, in his Individual and Official Capacities
King-El v. Wilson et al
as 1:2020cv00229
Defendant:
FNU Wilson, Saint T. Tapp and Jeffery E. James
Plaintiff:
Timothy D. King-El
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
King-El v. Wilson et al
as 5:2020ct03261
Defendant:
Saint T. Tapp, Sgt. Wilson and Jeffery E. James
Plaintiff:
Timothy D. King-El
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timothy King-El v. Lonnie Meadow
as 17-6341
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TIMOTHY D. KING-EL
Defendant - Appellee:
LONNIE MEADOWS
Carter v. State of West Virginia et al
as 2:2017cv00332
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Eugene Carter
Defendant:
State of West Virginia, Charleston Police Dept. Officers, Andrew W. Foster and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Frankie LordMaster v. E. Barksdale
as 16-6869
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FRANKIE JAE LORDMASTER, f/k/a Jason Robert Goldader
Defendant - Appellee:
E. BARKSDALE, Warden; Red Onion, UNKNOWN MEMBER, Red Onion's Goon Squad, MUNICIPAL (LIABILITY) OF POUND and others
King-El v. Meadows
as 5:2016ct03047
Plaintiff:
Timothy D. King-El
Defendant:
Lonnie Meadows
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Reginald Ball v. Jeffrey Artrip
as 14-7659
Plaintiff - Appellant:
REGINALD KEITH BALL
Defendant - Appellee:
JEFFREY ARTRIP, G. K. WASHINGTON, ASST. WARDEN WALWRATH and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00836
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Carter v. Harvey et al
as 3:2010cv00715
Plaintiff:
Leonard Carter, Jr.
Defendant:
A. P. Harvey, Y. M. Taylor, J. Combs and others
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.
