Cases 1 - 10 of 28
Jones v. Wellpath, LLC et al
as 0:2024cv00031
Plaintiff:
Bradley Jones
Defendant:
Wellpath, LLC, Shawn McKenzie, Judy Baker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hairston v. Eagle et al
as 1:2023cv12631
Plaintiff:
Ardell Hairston
Defendant:
Eagle, McNeil and Palmer
Robertson v. Taylor et al
as 1:2023cv00891
Plaintiff:
Melvin Robertson
Defendant:
Officer Robert Taylor, City of Cleveland and Giant Eagle, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Michael Gresham v. Pamela Austin, et al
as 22-2063
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL ISHMAEL GRESHAM
Defendant / Appellee:
PAMELA AUSTIN, DDS Dentist, UNKNOWN LESE, Correctional Officer, S. EAGLE, named as Unknown S. Eagle or Jane Doe Dental Assistant and others
Pugh-Michael v. Denny et al
as 4:2019cv00139
Defendant:
Mike Lewis, Samuel Denny, Ms. Eagles and others
Plaintiff:
Joseph Pugh-Michael
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Blanton et al v. Lewis et al
as 4:2017cv00115
Plaintiff:
Bradley Todd Blanton and Alex Reed
Defendant:
Lewis, All of Staff on Shift Alpha and Beta 1, 2, Delta 2, Charlie 2, Elaine C. Blanton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Veeder v. TRI-CAP et al
as 4:2017cv11690
Plaintiff:
Randy Veeder
Defendant:
TRI-CAP, Board of Directors, Eric Burgess and others
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Michael Gresham v. Pamela Austin, et al
as 16-2049
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL GRESHAM
Defendant - Appellee:
PAMELA AUSTIN, DDS Dentist, UNKNOWN LESE, Correctional Officer, S. EAGLE, named as Unknown S. Eagle or Jane Doe Dental Assistant and others
Gresham #272603 v. Austin et al
as 2:2016cv00071
Plaintiff:
Michael Gresham #272603
Defendant:
Pamela Austin, Unknown Lese, S. Eagle and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kevin Walking Eagle v. R. Hanson
as 15-3894
Petitioner - Appellant:
KEVIN WALKING EAGLE
Respondent - Appellee:
R. HANSON
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.
