Cases 51 - 60 of 224
Koger v. Mohr et al
as 4:2017cv02409
Plaintiff:
Cecil Koger
Defendant:
Gary C Mohr, Todd Ishee, Michael Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Payne v. Mohr et al
as 3:2017cv01938
Plaintiff:
Michael A. Payne
Defendant:
Gary C. Mohr and John J. Coleman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wineinger v. Mohr et al
as 3:2017cv01726
Plaintiff:
Thomas David Wineinger
Defendant:
Gary C. Mohr, N. Turner, Dr. Eddy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re: Gary Otte, et al v. John Kasich, et al
as 17-3800
:
In re: OHIO EXECUTION PROTOCOL LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GARY OTTE and RAYMOND TIBBETTS
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN KASICH, Governor, State of Ohio, GARY C. MOHR, Director, ODRC, DONALD MORGAN, Warden, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility and others
Lance Goldman v. Consumers Credit Union, et al
as 17-1700
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LANCE ADAM GOLDMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
CONSUMERS CREDIT UNION, KALAMAZOO, COUNTY OF, RICHARD C. FULLER, III, Sheriff and others
Finfrock v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections et al
as 3:2017cv01264
Plaintiff:
Joseph W Finfrock
Defendant:
Gary C Mohr , Neil Turner and Becky Joyce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fitzpatrick v. Cuyahoga County
as 1:2017cv01235
Plaintiff:
Gary C. Fitzpatrick, Sr.
Defendant:
Cuyahoga County
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Finfrock v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections et al
as 2:2017cv00480
Plaintiff:
Joseph W Finfrock
Defendant:
Gary C Mohr, Neil Turner and Becky Joyce
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hargrove v. Abrams et al
as 1:2017cv01045
Plaintiff:
Daniel P. Hargrove
Defendant:
Abrams, Aramark, Gary C Mohr and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jeremy Gallant v. Faisal Ahmed, et al
as 17-3511
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JEREMY P. GALLANT
Defendant - Appellee:
FAISAL AHMED, MONA PARKS, HAWKINS and others
Defendant:
MAHLMAN, GARY C. MOHR and CADOGAN
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.
