Cases 11 - 20 of 23
Shoemaker v. Merritt et al
as 6:2013cv03115
Plaintiff:
Walter C. Shoemaker
Defendant:
Wayne Merritt, John 1 Doe, John 2 Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dunn v. Mattivi et al
as 4:2013cv00092
Plaintiff:
Adrian L. Dunn, Sr.
Defendant:
Michael Mattivi, John 1 Doe and John 2 Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Herrington v. Nixon et al
as 5:2013cv06022
Defendant:
Jeremiah W. Nixon, George Lombardi, MO Board of Probation & Parole and others
Plaintiff:
Jacob Andrew Herrington
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nachbar v. Miller et al
as 6:2012cv03458
Plaintiff:
Carol Nachbar
Defendant:
Allison Miller, City of Springfield Health Department, City of Springfield and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Singleton v. Snodgrass et al
as 4:2012cv00709
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey W Singleton
Defendant:
Ron Snodgrass, St. Clair County, John 1 Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Duenas-Diaz v. St Paul, City of et al
as 0:2011cv03361
Plaintiff:
Ashok Duenas-Diaz
Defendant:
St Paul, City of , John 1 Doe , John 2 Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kobel v. Correctional Medical Services et al
as 2:2011cv04223
Plaintiff:
Scott Harris Kobel
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Services, Corizon, Missouri Dept. of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bailey v. Meyers et al
as 5:2011cv06033
Plaintiff:
David E. Bailey
Defendant:
Timothy Meyers, John #1 Doe, John #2 Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
v. Bustillo et al
as 6:2010cv03326
Plaintiff:
Fernando Bustillo
Defendant:
Harley Lappin, John Doe, Michael K Nalley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Pryor-Kendrick v. Epperson et al
as 3:2010cv05056
Plaintiff:
Theresa CW Pryor-Kendrick
Defendant:
Mark Epperson, David Snook, Miller 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.
