Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Christopher T. Hicks et al v. Alaska USA Federal Credit Union et al
as 8:2017cv01900
Defendant:
Alaska USA Federal Credit Union and Does
Plaintiff:
Christopher T Hicks
Donoghue v. Nooth et al
as 6:2013cv01675
Defendant:
C/O A. Arnold, G/C T. Hicks, Sgt. J. Mena and others
Plaintiff:
Steven Keith Donoghue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Eric Hicks v. Thrifty Payless, Inc.
as 11-55507
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ERIC T. HICKS
Defendant - Appellee:
THRIFTY PAYLESS, INC., Str 9804
Jeffrey Olney v. John Hartwig, et al
as 11-35180
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JEFFREY W. OLNEY
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN HARTWIG, Department of Corrections Doctor, Snake River Correctional Instituition, J. GILMORE, T. HICKS and others
Loos v. Oregon Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2011cv00208
Defendant:
Correctional Officer Brooks, Correctional Officer Carbojal, Officer "John Doe" and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel C. Loos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Justin Dobson, et al v. Eldon Vail, et al
as 10-35726
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JUSTIN DOBSON, GEORGE T. HICKS, ROGER MICHAEL HOTRUM and others
Defendant - Appellee:
ELDON VAIL, MAGGIE MILLER-STOUT, ROBERT HERZOG and others
Eric T. Hicks v. Garfield Beach CVS LLC et al
as 5:2010cv01023
Defendant:
Garfield Beach CVS LLC and Thrifty Payless CVS LLC
Plaintiff:
Eric T Hicks
Eric T. Hicks v. Garfield Beach CVS LLC et al
as 5:2010cv00793
Defendant:
Garfield Beach CVS LLC and Thrifty Payless Inc
Plaintiff:
Eric T Hicks
Johnson v. Rouse et al
as 6:2010cv06112
Defendant:
J. Eastwood, T. Hicks, Mark Nooth and others
Plaintiff:
Richard Henry Johnson, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Rouse et al
as 3:2010cv06112
Defendant:
J. Eastwood, T. Hicks, Mark Nooth and others
Plaintiff:
Richard Henry Johnson, Jr.
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.
