Cases 11 - 20 of 34
McPeak v. Pierce et al
as 8:2019cv03167
Defendant:
Dr. A Getchew, Jane/Jon Doe and Holly Pierce
Plaintiff:
Randy H. McPeak
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Mobley v. Drybola et al
as 1:2019cv03099
Defendant:
Earl Clark, S. House, D. Drybola and others
Plaintiff:
Daytron L. Mobley, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Henson v. Pierce et al
as 1:2019cv03166
Defendant:
Holly Pierce, RNP, Dr. Arresahegn Getachen, M.D., Terri Prior, RNP and others
Plaintiff:
Mr. James A. Henson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Cox v. Getachew et al
as 8:2019cv02731
Plaintiff:
Christopher Reginald Cox
Defendant:
Asresahegn Getachew, Bill Beeman, Holly Pierce and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Rodriguez v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc. et al
as 1:2019cv02683
Plaintiff:
Mario Rodriguez
Defendant:
Wexford Health Sources, Inc. and Holly Pierce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Hughley v. Matthews et al
as 1:2019cv01950
Plaintiff:
Anthony Hughley
Defendant:
Wexford Health Sources, Inc., Matthews, Holly Pierce and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Appleby-El v. Wexford Health Sources et al
as 8:2019cv01868
Defendant:
RNP Krista Bilak, SELF, Mahboob Ashraf and others
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel B. Appleby-El
Cause Of Action: 02 U.S.C. § 1202
Fuller v. Corizon, Inc. et al
as 8:2019cv01705
Plaintiff:
Gerald Davis Fuller
Defendant:
Holly Pierce, RNP, Corizon, Inc. and Frank B. Bishop
Interested Party:
Office of the Attorney General and Division of Correction
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Ervin v. Corizon Health et al
as 1:2019cv01666
Plaintiff:
Roger Ervin
Defendant:
Matthew Carpenter, Corizon Health, Holly Pierce and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Stewart v. Corizon Health Company et al
as 1:2019cv00679
Plaintiff:
Maurice B. Stewart, Jr.
Defendant:
Holly Pierce and Corizon Health Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
