Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Jay Folse v. John McCuskey, Jr.
as 24-1285
Plaintiff:
JAY FOLSE
Defendant:
JOHN MCCUSKEY, JR., in his official and individual capacities, G. RUSSELL ROLLYSON, JR., in his official and individual capacities and MICHELLE JONES
Folse v. McCuskey et al
as 5:2024cv00021
Plaintiff:
Jay Folse
Defendant:
John McCuskey, Jr., G. Russell Rollyson, Jr. and Michelle Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hadidi v. Jones et al
as 4:2022cv00861
Plaintiff:
Sawsan Hadidi
Defendant:
Michelle Jones, Diana Stine, Amanda Blasius and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Covarrubia v. United States Of America et al
as 4:2018cv10082
Plaintiff:
Noel Covarrubia
Defendant:
United States Of America, DHS/ICE, DOJ and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Covarrubia v. United States of America et al
as 1:2018cv21332
Plaintiff:
Noel Covarrubia
Defendant:
United States of America, DHS/ICE, DOJ and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671
Harpo v. Howard et al
as 1:2016cv03876
Plaintiff:
Wilhy Harpo
Defendant:
Burnice A. Howard, James H. Atkins, Cornelius Abraham and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Maznick v. Recos et al
as 4:2015cv40105
Plaintiff:
Nicole M Maznick
Defendant:
William Recos, Michelle Jones and Timothy Ury
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Hollywood Casino Corporation et al
as 3:2014cv00109
Plaintiff:
Michelle Jones
Defendant:
Hollywood Casino Corporation and HWCC-Tunica, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Loadholt et al v. Obama et al
as 2:2013cv02607
Plaintiff:
Monica Loadholt and Michele Jones
Defendant:
Barack Obama, Chuck Hagel and Eric Holder
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343
Jones v. Napa Police Department et al
as 3:2007cv03054
Plaintiff:
Robert J. Jones
Defendant:
Napa Police Department, County of Napa, City of Napa and others
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.
