Cases 41 - 50 of 236
ASBERRY v. ANDERSON et al
as 1:2022cv00018
Plaintiff:
JOHNNY ASBERRY
Defendant:
COUNSELOR ANDERSON, MARK MARTIN, GOVERNOR BRIAN KEMP and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MCCURTY v. TROTMAN et al
as 5:2022cv00051
Plaintiff:
DREXEL MCCURTY
Defendant:
LT TROTMAN, LT WALLER, LT BOOT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DAUGHTRY v. PROSSER et al
as 5:2022cv00059
Plaintiff:
RICARDO CASTAVIOUS DAUGHTRY
Defendant:
LT PROSSER, CERT OFFICER SLAPPY, WARDEN MARTIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00058
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
CUMMINGS v. BERRY et al
as 5:2022cv00019
Plaintiff:
TRAVIS CUMMINGS
Defendant:
WARDEN BERRY WALTER, DEPUTY ERIC MARTIN, CHIEF CONSELOR WHIPPLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00027
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
SMITH v. BERRY et al
as 5:2022cv00014
Plaintiff:
TERRANCE SMITH
Defendant:
WARDEN WALTER BERRY, DEPUTY WARDEN ERIC MARTIN, CHIEF COUNSELOR PRETRILLION WHIPPLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. WILLAMSON et al
as 5:2021cv00453
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER ADDARRYL JONES and TUPAC DAVID SHAKUR
Defendant:
TERRANCE DENNIS, KELSIE WILLIAMSON, WARDEN BERRY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WILSON v. PERRY et al
as 5:2021cv00457
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL DAVID WILSON, JR
Defendant:
WARDEN CLINTON PERRY, JESSICA DEAN, LACHAKA MCKENZIE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CAMPBELL v. BERRY et al
as 5:2021cv00445
Plaintiff:
DAVID LANE CAMPBELL
Defendant:
WARDEN WALTER BERRY, ERIC MARTIN, REGINA WOMBLE 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.
