Cases 21 - 30 of 57
Curry v. County of Clayton et al
as 1:2016cv04379
Plaintiff:
Debra Denise Curry
Defendant:
County of Clayton, Terry Baskin, Tomisha Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shavers v. Murphy
as 3:2016cv05421
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Shavers
Defendant:
Michael Murphy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Fatchet McGee et al v. City of Stow, Ohio et al
as 5:2016cv00482
Plaintiff:
Jo Fatchet McGee and Lori Fatchet McGee
Defendant:
City of Stow, Ohio , Michael Murphy and Brian Haddix
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
KENDRICK v. UPPER MORELAND TOWNSHIP et al
as 2:2015cv05744
Plaintiff:
JEREMIAH KENDRICK
Defendant:
UPPER MORELAND TOWNSHIP , UPPER MORELAND TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT , S. MICHAEL MURPHY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murphy v. Kahn
as 1:2015cv12964
Plaintiff:
Michael Murphy
Defendant:
Donnalynn Kahn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Murray v. Williams et al (TV3)
as 3:2015cv00284
Plaintiff:
Loretta Murray, Billy Dean Murray, Bobby Dean Murray and others
Defendant:
Frank Williams, Roane County Chancellor, Denise Butler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kagonyera v. Buncombe County et al
as 1:2014cv00251
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Kagonyera
Defendant:
Buncombe County, Bobby Lee Medford, Samuel Matthew Constance and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anthony Hayes, Sr. v. A.C. Wharton, et al
as 14-5948
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANTHONY D. HAYES, SR.
Defendant - Appellee:
A.C. WHARTON, Mayor of the City of Memphis, CITY OF MEMPHIS, DENEEN ALSADI, H.R. Manager and others
Murphy v. Oregon Medical Board et al
as 3:2014cv01135
Defendant:
Jane Doe, John Doe, Nita Goss and others
Plaintiff:
James Michael Murphy, MD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Murphy v. Oreogn Medical Board et al
as 0:2014cv01135
Defendant:
John/Jane Doe, Nita Goss, Oreogn Medical Board and others
Plaintiff:
MD James Michael Murphy
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.
