Cases 71 - 80 of 429
BRYANT v. FRANKLIN et al
as 1:2022cv02244
Plaintiff:
KEITH LEE BRYANT
Defendant:
ANDREA FRANKLIN, CONSTANCE SCHMITT, KEITH HARTZELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BRADLEY v. BYRD et al
as 2:2022cv00522
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE C. BRADLEY
Defendant:
BYRD, CLARKE, K. HOBSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROMERO v. HEATHER et al
as 4:2022cv00148
Plaintiff:
KAINE ROMERO
Defendant:
HEATHER, COURTNEY, MARLINA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BRADLEY v. WARDEN et al
as 2:2022cv00524
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE C. BRADLEY
Defendant:
WARDEN, HALL, PIGG and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MYNATT v. REAGLE et al
as 2:2022cv00514
Plaintiff:
JARED MYNATT
Defendant:
DENNIS REAGLE, MAGGIE BRYANT, RUIZ and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LANGSTON KISER v. GLADIEUX et al
as 1:2022cv02206
Plaintiff:
ADAM KEITH LANGSTON KISER
Defendant:
DAVID GLADIEUX, ALLEN COUNTY CONFINEMENT STAFF, QUALITY CARE CONTROL MED SERVICE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
REYNOLDS v. BYRD et al
as 1:2022cv02152
Plaintiff:
STEVEN REYNOLDS
Defendant:
SAMUEL J. BYRD, KIM HOBSON, JOHN DOE, I and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MOTON v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC et al
as 1:2022cv02134
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC, ELAINE PERDUE, LISA HAMBLEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GRIFFITH v. HENDRIX et al
as 2:2022cv00467
Plaintiff:
KYLE RAY GRIFFITH
Defendant:
JAY HENDRIX, C. HOLCOMB, TAWNI TEMPLETON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GRIFFIN v. STATE OF INDIANA IDOC et al
as 1:2022cv02052
Plaintiff:
OSCAR K. GRIFFIN
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA IDOC, ARAMARK FOOD SERVICES, BOWEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
