Cases 71 - 80 of 288
MAUL v. RICHMOND STATE OF INDIANA HOSPITAL, ET AL
as 1:2020cv02338
Defendant:
YOUNG, CHRIS R MD and RICHMOND STATE OF INDIANA HOSPITAL
Plaintiff:
RICHARD E. MAUL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Maul v. Richmond State of Indiana Hospital et al
as 3:2020cv00755
Plaintiff:
Richard E Maul
Defendant:
Young, Richmond State of Indiana Hospital and Chris R MD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richmond v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc. et al
as 3:2020cv00143
Defendant:
Mohammed Siddiqui, Zimmer, Wexford Health Sources, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Darnell Richmond
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fernandez v. Tack et al
as 1:2020cv00190
Defendant:
John R. Baldwin, Tracy Rogers, Jeffries and others
Plaintiff:
George Albert Fernandez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NAPIER v. WARE et al
as 1:2020cv00071
Plaintiff:
JAMES B. NAPIER
Defendant:
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT and RENEE WARE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHMOND v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC et al
as 1:2020cv00039
Defendant:
WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC, WALTON, JESSE and others
Plaintiff:
ANTWOIN RICHMOND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richmond v. Smith et al
as 1:2019cv08503
Defendant:
City of Chicago The, City of Chicago Detention Aide Smith, Detention Aide Barnes and others
Plaintiff:
Thaddeus Richmond
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Artis v. Cook County Sheriff et al
as 1:2019cv08179
Defendant:
Kimberly Foxx, Illinois Department of Corrections employees John Does 1-5, Jason E Hoselton and others
Plaintiff:
Richmond Artis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richmond v. Ek
as 4:2019cv04203
Plaintiff:
Rashad K. Richmond and Rashad K Richmond
Defendant:
Jonathan Ek
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richmond v. Rutherford et al
as 3:2019cv01097
Defendant:
Lieutenant Dixon, C/O Hannah, C/O Rutherford and others
Plaintiff:
Rashad Richmond
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.
