Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Scott v. LaPorte County Community Corrections et al
as 3:2020cv00476
Defendant:
Brown, Atwater and LaPorte County Community Corrections
Plaintiff:
Charles Scott
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cline et al v. LaPorte County Community Corrections et al
as 3:2020cv00422
Plaintiff:
Thomas D Galloway, II, Charles Scott, Mario Hanserd and others
Defendant:
Atwater, LaPorte County Community Corrections and Brown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scott v. LaPorte County Community Corrections et al
as 3:2020cv00054
Plaintiff:
Charles Scott and Charles H Scott
Defendant:
Collins, LaPorte County Community Corrections and Robert Neary
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scott v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2019cv00957
Plaintiff:
Charles Scott and Charles HN Scott
Defendant:
LaPorte County of, Indiana State of and Michigan City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scott v. LaPorte County Jail et al
as 3:2019cv00798
Defendant:
LaPorte County Jail, Quality Correctional Care LLC and Dr. Tchettchat
Plaintiff:
Charles Scott
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cislo et al v. LaPorte County Jail et al
as 3:2019cv00765
Plaintiff:
Tylar Webber, Tara Smith, Charles Scott and others
Defendant:
Dr. Tchettchat, Quality Correctional Care LLC and LaPorte County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scott v. Rodriguez et al
as 2:2019cv00342
Defendant:
CPL Fransisco Rodriguez, DET Willie Henderson, DET Mike Walker and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Scott
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scott v. USA
as 2:2017cv00289
Respondent:
United States of America
Petitioner:
Charles Scott
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Scott v. USA
as 2:2016cv00309
Respondent:
United States of America
Petitioner:
Charles Scott
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Scott v. United States of America
as 2:2016cv00305
Petitioner:
Charles Scott
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
