Cases 1 - 10 of 97
Prater v. McBurney et al
as 1:2024cv03880
Plaintiff:
R. Christopher Prater
Defendant:
Robert McBurney and John Thomson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Jacques Smith v. David Yost, et al
as 24-3608
Defendant:
MARK TEKULVE, Clermont County Prosecutor, MIKE DEWINE, Ohio Governor, DAVID YOST, Ohio Attorney General and others
Plaintiff:
JACQUES E. SMITH
Tara Chestnut v. ACP/467, et al
as 24-1790
Plaintiff:
TARA CHESTNUT
Defendant:
ACP/467, CHIDIALDI EZENGWU, CHANELL PRATER and others
CHESTNUT v. ACP/467 et al
as 2:2024cv01674
Plaintiff:
TARA CHESTNUT
Defendant:
ACP/467, CHIDIALDI EZENGWU, CHANELL PRATER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Charmaine Prater v. Tara Chestnut, et al
as 24-1480
Plaintiff:
OVA 467 and CHARMAINE PRATER
Defendant:
TARA CHESTNUT, ROXANE CRAWLEY, ESQUIRE, PHILADELPHIA LEGAL ASSISTANCE and others
Smith v. Yost et al
as 1:2023cv00749
Plaintiff:
Jacques E. Smith
Defendant:
David Yost, Hon. Judge Richard P. Ferenc, Hon. Judge Charles L. Prater and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Maldonado Castillo v. Prater et al
as 5:2023cv00675
Plaintiff:
Luis Antonio Maldonado Castillo
Defendant:
David Prater, Stephanie Powers, Merydith Easter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
City of Philadelphia Revenue v. John Doe, et al
as 23-2088
Plaintiff / Appellee:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA REVENUE
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN DOE
Defendant / Appellant:
OVA/467, AKA Charmaine Custis and CHARMAINE PRATER
Tara Chestnut v. OVA/467, et al
as 23-2081
Plaintiff / Appellee:
TARA CHESTNUT
Defendant / Appellant:
OVA/467 and CHARMAINE PRATER
Defendant / Appellee:
FAMILY MEMBERS, JOHN DOE and JANE DOE
Tara Chestnut v. OVA/467, et al
as 23-1959
Plaintiff / Appellee:
TARA CHESTNUT
Defendant / Appellant:
OVA/467 and CHARMAINE PRATER
Defendant / Appellee:
FAMILY MEMBERS, JOHN DOE and JANE DOE
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.
