Cases 31 - 40 of 119
WATSON v. HARMON et al
as 1:2021cv00877
Plaintiff:
TRAVIS L. WATSON
Defendant:
LISA HARMON, JANE DOE, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kincaid v. UNC Chapel Hill Hospital et al
as 5:2021ct03345
Plaintiff:
Donald Kincaid
Defendant:
UNC Chapel Hill Hospital, Dr. Ms. Jane Doe and NCDPS Division of Adult Correction
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
FOSKEY v. U.S. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE et al
as 1:2021cv00773
Plaintiff:
MARSHALL H. FOSKEY
Defendant:
U.S. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, JANET YELLEN, CHARLES P. RETTIG and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Hefner v. Jones et al
as 1:2021cv00227
Plaintiff:
Ricky L. Hefner
Defendant:
Johnathan Heath Jones, Kimberly Osborne-Evans, Sylva Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Budney v. Honeycutt, et al
as 1:2021cv00062
Defendant:
FNU Ellis, FNU Wilson, FNU Hartzog and others
Plaintiff:
Matthew R. Budney
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Whitener v. The Rutherford County Detention Center et al
as 1:2021cv00048
Defendant:
Chris Francis, Jane Doe 1, RCDC's Healthcare Provider and others
Plaintiff:
Ronnie Dale Whitener
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brown v. Hernandez et al
as 5:2021cv00024
Defendant:
Sophia Feaster, M. Dula, Amy Jenkins and others
Plaintiff:
Marcus Randall Brown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kirk v. Davis et al
as 3:2020cv00675
Defendant:
Jane Doe, City of Charlotte, William Todd Walther and others
Plaintiff:
Kareem Abdullah Kirk
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GLENN v. POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF DURHAM et al
as 1:2020cv00634
Plaintiff:
GURLEY E. GLENN
Defendant:
CHIEF CERELYN DAVIS, POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF DURHAM, JOHN DOE #1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Doe et al
as 3:2020cv00286
Defendant:
Gregory Haynes, Jane Doe, John Doe and others
Plaintiff:
John Thomas Jones, III
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.
