Cases 1 - 9 of 9
David Davis v. Fredeane Artis
as 24-1179
Petitioner:
DAVID DOUGLAS DAVIS
Respondent:
FREDEANE ARTIS, Warden
David McCloyIn re: David McCloy
as 23-1049
Petitioner:
In re: DAVID DOUGLAS MCCLOY
Respondent:
BRYAN MORRISON, Warden
Hurley v. King et al
as 2:2022cv12408
Plaintiff:
David Douglas Hurley
Defendant:
Jeff King, Anthony Bateman, L. Dickson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Heath v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
as 1:2015cv00541
Petitioner:
David Douglas Heath
Respondent:
Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Allen v. Calhoun, County of et al
as 1:2014cv00285
Plaintiff:
William Allen
Defendant:
Calhoun, County of, Christopher Young, John Dally and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
David Douglas v. John Swing, et al
as 11-4170
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID DOUGLAS
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN SWING, In his Individual Capacity and his Official Capacity as a patrolman Miami Township Police Dept., MIAMI, TOWNSHIP OF, BOB WEST, In his Individual Capacity and in his Official Capacity as a Patrolman with the Milford City Police and others
David Douglas v. John Swing, et al
as 11-3977
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID DOUGLAS
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN SWING, In his Individual Capacity and his Official Capacity as a patrolman Miami Township Police Dept., MIAMI, TOWNSHIP OF, BOB WEST, In his Individual Capacity and in his Official Capacity as a Patrolman with the Milford City Police and others
Douglas v. Swing et al
as 1:2010cv00014
Plaintiff:
David Douglas
Defendant:
John Swing, Miami, Township of, Bob West and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2007cv00092
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
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.
