Cases 11 - 20 of 45
HARDIN v. PEAKE et al
as 1:2022cv00691
Plaintiff:
CHARLIE L. HARDIN
Defendant:
MAGISTRATE JUDGE ELIZABETH JOI PEAKE, KATY POOLE, OFFICER WILEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Saunders v. Warden
as 1:2022cv01895
Plaintiff:
Michael Saunders
Defendant:
Warden, Chief Mann, Gov of MD and others
Interested Party:
Division of Correction
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Muhammad v. Vandime et al
as 1:2022cv01104
Plaintiff:
Walid A. Muhammad
Defendant:
Psychologist Vandime, Correctional Officer Cronin, Correctional Officer Houser and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas Rose v. Officer Adams
as 22-6413
Plaintiff / Appellant:
THOMAS A. ROSE
Defendant / Appellee:
OFFICER ADAMS, Correctional Officer at RNCC, OFFICER E PAISELY and K-9 SERGEANT J. ROBINSON
Karr v. Ross et al
as 5:2021cv05218
Plaintiff:
Robert Joseph Karr, III
Defendant:
Officer Ross and Officer Adams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wetzel v. Pamlico County Government et al
as 5:2021ct03281
Plaintiff:
Melvin David Wetzel, II
Defendant:
Pamlico County Government, Sheriff Chris Davis, Major Arthur Collins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jacques v. Hill et al
as 1:2021cv21648
Defendant:
Espino, Guttini, Officer Girobey and others
Plaintiff:
Patrick Jacques
WHITING v. SERGEANT LIBERTY et al
as 1:2021cv08282
Defendant:
OFFICER REED, OFFICER XAYAPHACHAN, OFFICER TRAN and others
Plaintiff:
ADELBERT A. WHITING
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Torres v. Officer Adam Carney
as 5:2021cv00176
Plaintiff:
Quirino Torres
Defendant:
Officer FNU Carne, Bexar County Adult Detention Center and Officer Adam Carney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rose v. Adams et al
as 7:2020cv00609
Defendant:
Officer John Doe, Officer Pasely and Officer Adams
Plaintiff:
Thomas A. Rose
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.
