Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Patton v. Tupelo Police Dept et al
as 1:2024cv00156
Plaintiff:
Antonio Patton
Defendant:
North MS Narcotic Unit and Tupelo Police Dept
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Other Civil Rights
Toy v. Jones et al
as 4:2024cv00026
Plaintiff:
Willie Lee Toy, Sr.
Defendant:
Tameka Jones, Abraham Gates, Humphreys County Sheriff Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Reardon v. State of Mississippi et al
as 3:2022cv00050
Plaintiff:
Matthew Oliver Reardon
Defendant:
State of Mississippi, Lafayette County, MS, Lafayette County Chancery Court and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Morris v. Dept. of Human Services
as 4:2019cv00097
Defendant:
Dept. of Human Services
Plaintiff:
James Morris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Sanderson v. Alcorn Co. Dept. of Human Services et al
as 1:2018cv00230
Defendant:
Alcorn Co. Dept. of Human Services, Ryan Toms, Barbara Proctor and others
Plaintiff:
John Sanderson, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harris v. Dimon et al
as 3:2017cv00215
Plaintiff:
Tewania C. Harris
Defendant:
Jamie Dimon , Donald Trump, US FBI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Roberson v. Ferguson et al
as 4:2017cv00100
Plaintiff:
Latonia Roberson
Defendant:
James Ferguson , Kosciusko Police Dept. and Mark Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. DeSoto County Sheriff Dept. et al
as 3:2017cv00040
Plaintiff:
Frederick Smith
Defendant:
DeSoto County Sheriff Dept. , Bill Rasco , Charles Mahon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Boyd v. Mississippi Dept. of Corrections
as 3:2016cv00255
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Boyd
Defendant:
Mississippi Dept of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jamison v. Barbar et al
as 1:2009cv00197
Plaintiff:
Carl Jamison, Sr.
Defendant:
Tony Barbar and Verona Police Dept.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
