Cases 31 - 40 of 56
Lyles v. Rutherford County Adult Detention Center et al
as 3:2011cv00266
Plaintiff:
Kenyata K. Lyles
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Center , John Daniel Rudd , Cindy Wayley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Alajemba v. Rutherford County Adult Detention Center et al
as 3:2010cv00957
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Alajemba
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Center and Curtis Little
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Miller v. Rutherford County Adult Detention Center et al
as 3:2009cv00746
Plaintiff:
Tyrone O. Miller
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Center and Rutherford County Adult Detention Center Medical Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Miller v. Rutherford County Adult Detention Center et al
as 3:2009mc00096
Plaintiff:
Tyrone O. Miller
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Center and Rutherford County Adult Detention Center Medical Department
McCullough v. Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
as 3:2009cv00168
Plaintiff:
Fernando O. McCullough
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
McCullough v. Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
as 3:2009mc00015
Plaintiff:
Fernando O. McCullough
Defendant:
Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
Nellums v. Jones et al
as 3:2008cv01199
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Nellums
Defendant:
Truman Jones and Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Carter v. Jones et al
as 3:2008cv01150
Plaintiff:
John Carter
Defendant:
Truman Jones and Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Jones v. Jones et al
as 3:2008mc00275
Plaintiff:
Scott Jones
Defendant:
Truman Jones and Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
Carter v. Jones et al
as 3:2008mc00276
Plaintiff:
John Carter
Defendant:
Truman Jones and Rutherford County Adult Detention Center
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.
