Cases 31 - 40 of 127
Doe v. Eckerson et al
as 5:2020cv06135
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
lisa worrell, Joshua Quinn Eckerson, Harrison County and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Doe v. Steen et al
as 4:2020cv00930
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
Officer Zachary Tunison, Officer Brian Johnson, Sheriff John Cottle and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Hunter v. Doe et al
as 4:2020cv00627
Defendant:
Jane Doe
Plaintiff:
Nychole Hunter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Doe et al v. Steen et al
as 4:2020cv00929
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe and Eric Brotherton
Defendant:
Zachary Tunison, Brian Johnson, Sheriff John Cottle and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Perry v. St. Francois County et al
as 4:2020cv00843
Defendant:
Charles Pewitt, John Does 1-5, Deputy Jane Doe and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Perry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Doe 1 et al v. The Curators of the University of Missouri
as 2:2019cv04229
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2
Defendant:
The Curators of the University of Missouri
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1681
Reed v. Smart et al
as 6:2019cv03348
Defendant:
Jane Doe, Vice Presidents of Missouri State University, Chief of Police and others
Plaintiff:
Steven L. Reed
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hall v. The City of St. Louis, Missouri et al
as 4:2019cv02579
Defendant:
Lawrence O'Toole, Lyda Krewson, Randy Hays and others
Plaintiff:
Luther Hall
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rogers et al v. Gaston et al
as 6:2019cv03346
Defendant:
John Doe 1-3, Douglas D Gaston and Jane Doe 1-3
Plaintiff:
Norma Rogers, Arthur Rogers and William Hale
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Doorack Brick Contracting Company v. Chesterfield, Missouri, City of et al
as 4:2019cv02336
Defendant:
Michael Herring, John and Jane Doe Members of the Chesterfield City Council, John Nation and others
Plaintiff:
Doorack Brick Contracting Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
