Cases 81 - 90 of 1,308
MacLachlan #844474 v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2023cv00806
Plaintiff:
Andrew MacLachlan #844474
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Nikki Monroe, Robert Crompton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barnett #642005 v. Michigan Department of Corrections
as 1:2023cv00760
Plaintiff:
Jared Rudolph Barnett #642005
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections
Interested Party:
Connie Broussea
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mark White v. MDOC, et al
as 23-1637
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARK EARL WHITE
Defendant / Appellee:
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, HEIDI E. WASHINGTON, DENTIST SMITH and others
Bonham v. Laurain et al
as 2:2023cv11594
Plaintiff:
Kevin Emanuel Bonham
Defendant:
Laurain, Michigan Department of Corrections and Corizon Health Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Killian v. King et al
as 2:2023cv11577
Plaintiff:
Travor Austin Killian and Trevor Austin Killian
Defendant:
Mat King, St. Clair County Sheriff's Department, Port Huron Police Department and others
Spoors v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2023cv11531
Plaintiff:
LaTanya V. Spoors
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Heidi E Washington, Grand Praire Healthcare Services and others
Estes v. Michigan Department of Corrections
as 2:2023cv11492
Plaintiff:
Larry Wendell Estes, Larry Kush and Little Larry
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections
Peterson v. Young et al
as 2:2023cv11493
Plaintiff:
Toran Peterson
Defendant:
Madeline Young, Ronald W. Chapman, Jeffrey L. Bomber and others
Estes v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2023cv11470
Plaintiff:
Larry Wendell Estes
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections and Heidi Washington
Dixon v. Chapman
as 5:2023cv11474
Petitioner:
Samuel Maurice Dixon, Jr.
Respondent:
Michigan Department of Corrections and Willis Chapman
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.
