Cases 1 - 10 of 137
Wilcox #182024 v. Peck et al
as 3:2024cv08115
Plaintiff:
Travis Ray Wilcox
Defendant:
Clayton Peck and Chad Fieple
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burch v. Pierce County et al
as 3:2024cv05286
Plaintiff:
Anthony David Burch
Defendant:
Pierce County, NaphCare, Byrer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lane v. Cantrell et al
as 4:2023cv00084
Petitioner:
Raven Lane
Respondent:
Richard Cantrell and Fort Peck Tribes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson v. Cantrell et al
as 4:2023cv00083
Petitioner:
Sierra Jackson
Respondent:
Richard Cantrell and Fort Peck Tribes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Peck v. Rivas et al
as 2:2023cv01870
Plaintiff:
Frank M. Peck
Defendant:
Rivas, Martin, T. Manalang and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carter-Shabazz v. Pierce County Council et al
as 3:2023cv06045
Plaintiff:
Mumit Xh Carter-Shabazz
Defendant:
Pierce County Council, NaphCare, Patty Jackson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rudolph v. Pierce County et al
as 3:2023cv05856
Plaintiff:
Brandon Neil Rudolph
Defendant:
Pierce County, NaphCare, Byrer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LeAir v. Pierce County et al
as 3:2023cv05738
Plaintiff:
Sebastian Grey LeAir
Defendant:
Pierce County, NaphCare, Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rozier v. Pierce County et al
as 3:2023cv05724
Plaintiff:
Timothy Eugene Rozier
Defendant:
Pierce County, NaphCare, Sieverson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stacy v. Pierce County et al
as 3:2023cv05718
Plaintiff:
Scott Ryan Stacy
Defendant:
Pierce County, NaphCare, Sieverson 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.
