Cases 31 - 40 of 254
Rose v. Rutherford County Sheriff's Office et al
as 3:2022cv00046
Plaintiff:
Phillip Michael Rose
Defendant:
Rutherford County Sheriff's Office, Rutherford County Adult Detention Center and Rudd Medical
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Collier v. Kast et al
as 3:2022cv00036
Plaintiff:
Dominic Collier
Defendant:
f/n/u Kast, Rutherford County Adult Detention Center and f/n/u l/n/u
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Proper v. Rutherford County Adult Detention Facility
as 3:2021cv00881
Plaintiff:
Nikolas S. Proper
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv00825
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Lusa et al v. Rutherford County et al
as 3:2021cv00813
Plaintiff:
Yananta Isi Chito Lusa, Wild Fire, Hakeem Shabazz-El and others
Defendant:
Rutherford County, Donna Scott Davenport and Lynn Dukes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv00751
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Ross v. Rudd Medical Care et al
as 3:2021cv00291
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Center and Rudd Medical Care
Plaintiff:
Brent Ross
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cianfarani v. Rutherford County Sheriff's Office et al
as 3:2021cv00256
Defendant:
Rutherford County Sheriff's Office and Chief Chris Fly
Plaintiff:
Marco Luciano Cianfarani
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Higgins v. Parsons et al
as 3:2021cv00250
Defendant:
Rutherford County and Deputy f/n/u Parsons
Plaintiff:
Charles Higgins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Trammell v. Rudd et al
as 3:2021cv00240
Defendant:
Rutherford County, Chief (f/n/u) Fly and Dr. (f/n/u) Rudd
Plaintiff:
Robert S. Trammell
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.
