Cases 31 - 40 of 57
Campbell v. Choi et al
as 0:2019cv02671
Respondent:
Judge Sara Grewing, Adam Bailey, John Choi and others
Petitioner:
James Paul Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Billups et al v. Minnesota Department of Corrections et al
as 0:2019cv02581
Defendant:
Officer. J. Elmore, Officer. Christopher Fodling, Officer. Matthew Kotaska and others
Plaintiff:
Adam R. Hageman and Khalil Billups
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Powell v. State of Minnesota et al
as 0:2018cv03415
Defendant:
Nurse Danielle Kenyon, Nick Vidal, Daniel Casey and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Y. Powell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hines v. State of Minnesota et al
as 0:2018cv03250
Defendant:
Brenda Smith, Doug Witte, Deborah MacNeill and others
Plaintiff:
Fredrick Dewayne Hines
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sterling v. Miles
as 0:2018cv03019
Plaintiff:
Adam Lee Sterling
Defendant:
Eddie Miles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hageman v. Morrison County Sheriff's Office et al
as 0:2018cv01005
Plaintiff:
Adam R. Hageman
Defendant:
Morrison County Sheriff's Office, Shawn Larsen, Scott MacKissock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Adams v. Minnesota Dept. of Corrections et al
as 0:2017cv05396
Plaintiff:
Nathan Lee Adams
Defendant:
Minnesota Dept. of Corrections, MN Appellate Public Defender and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Adams v. Sauk Rapids Police Dept. et al
as 0:2017cv05395
Plaintiff:
Nathan Lee Adams
Defendant:
Sauk Rapids Police Dept., Saint Clound Police Dept., Benton County and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Spencer v. Brott et al
as 0:2017cv05220
Plaintiff:
Marvin Spencer
Defendant:
Joel L. Brott, Todd Leonard, Michell Skroch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Spencer v. Brott et al
as 0:2017cv05035
Plaintiff:
Marvin Spencer
Defendant:
Joel L. Brott, Todd Leonard, Michelle Skroch and others
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.
