Cases 11 - 20 of 85
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2018cv00141
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Baskerville v. Berryhill
as 3:2018cv00381
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Lee Baskerville
Defendant:
Nancy A. Berryhill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Lovelace v. Baskerville Correctional Center
as 3:2018cv00138
Plaintiff:
Christopher Lovelace
Defendant:
Baskerville Correctional Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Matlho v. Baskerville et al
as 4:2018cv00012
Plaintiff:
Ballard Matlho
Defendant:
William Baskerville and Simco Logistics, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Piper Rountree v. Harold Clarke
as 17-6677
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PIPER ANN ROUNTREE
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLENE DAVIS, Assistant to Gary L. Bass, Virginia Department of Corrections, PHYLLIS BASKERVILLE, Prior Warden, Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women, GARY L. BASS, Regional Adminstrator Virginia Department of Corrections and others
Donna J. Hockman v. Phyllis Baskerville
as 17-6027
Petitioner - Appellant:
DONNA J. HOCKMAN
Respondent - Appellee:
PHYLLIS BASKERVILLE
Christopher Claiborne v. Carl Hester
as 16-7259
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER LEE CLAIBORNE
Respondent - Appellee:
CARL K. HESTER, Warden, Baskerville Correctional Center
Christopher Steg v. James Johnson
as 16-1654
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER B. STEG and CAYLA B. STEG
Defendant - Appellee:
JAMES H. JOHNSON, CONRAD BOYD STURGES, III, DAVIS, STURGES AND TOMLINSON, Lawyers and others
Steg et al v. Johnson et al
as 5:2016cv00149
Plaintiff:
Christopher B. Steg and Cayla B. Steg
Defendant:
James H. Johnson, Conrad Boyd Sturges, III, Davis, Sturges and Tomlinson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Farabee v. Tomlin et al
as 2:2016cv00103
Plaintiff:
Brian Farabee
Defendant:
Linda M.H. Tomlin, Ann Cabell Baskervill, Dinwiddie County Virginia 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.
