Cases 21 - 30 of 59
Stanley v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction et al
as 2:2017oe00166
Plaintiff:
Emmalee Stanley
Defendant:
Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Ohio Reformatory for Women, Gary Mohr and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Stanley v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction et al
as 2:2017cv00167
Plaintiff:
Emmalee Stanley
Defendant:
Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Ohio Reformatory for Women, Gary C Mohr and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stanley v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction et al
as 2:2017cv00166
Plaintiff:
Emmalee Stanley
Defendant:
Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Ohio Reformatory for Women, Gary Mohr and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Gray v. Hatfield et al
as 1:2016cv00999
Plaintiff:
Kevin Gray
Defendant:
Jasen Hatfield , Butler County Sheriff , Mike Brockman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Moe v. City of Logan Ohio et al
as 2:2016oe00653
Plaintiff:
Michael G Moe
Defendant:
City of Logan Ohio, Ethan Doerr and JOHN DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Moe v. City of Logan Ohio et al
as 2:2016cv00654
Plaintiff:
Michael G Moe
Defendant:
City of Logan Ohio, Ethan Doerr and JOHN DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv03096
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Surface et al v. Conklin et al
as 1:2015cv00040
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey P. Surface and Laura Pavlech
Defendant:
Scott Conklin, Michael K. Dickey, Todd Adamson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv00009
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2013cv00042
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
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.
