Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Easley v. Didion et al.
as 3:2024cv00943
Plaintiff:
Easley
Defendant:
Correction Officer Megan Marie Didion, Correction Officer Spiegner and Ms. Baker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Easley v. Nolan et al
as 3:2023cv01756
Plaintiff:
David Easley
Defendant:
Aaron J. Nolan, Robia Jones-Barringer, Lucas County Jail and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Easley v. Anderson et al
as 3:2022cv01397
Plaintiff:
D. Easley
Defendant:
Jori Anderson, Ms. Shaffer, Kelly Storm and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv01110
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Easley v. Officer Good
as 3:2019cv02575
Plaintiff:
Andre W. Easley
Defendant:
Officer Good
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Easley v. Zimmerman et al
as 3:2018cv02050
Defendant:
Deputy Warden Feloncamp, Lieutenant Biederman, Officer Poupard and others
Plaintiff:
David Easley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Easley v. Mohre et al.
as 3:2018cv00470
Plaintiff:
Andre W. Easley
Defendant:
Anna Good and Gary Mohre
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv00544
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Easley v. Alexander
as 5:2012cv03001
Petitioner:
Ronald Easley
Respondent:
Drew Alexander
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Austin et al v. Wilkinson et al
as 4:2001cv00071
Plaintiff:
Charles E. Austin , Michael Benge , Alonzo L. Bonner and others
Defendant:
Reginald Wilkinson , Stephen J Huffman , Bernard J. Ryznar and others
Interested_party:
Anthony M. Hoepf, Raymond Mefford, Derrick Scott Newmann and others
Movant:
Dave Easley, Eugene Groves, James T. Thomas 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.
