Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Jones et al v. Hill et al
as 1:2020cv02791
Defendant:
Kevin Thomas, Terrance Gibson, Maurice Johnson and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Singleton, Barry Watkins, Rhonda Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Singleton v. Warner et al
as 3:2016cv05571
Plaintiff:
Michael Singleton
Defendant:
Bernard E Warner, Patrick R Glebe, Dennis Harmon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
A.K.A. JUSTICE v. THE CRIMINAL SYSTEMS OF N.J., S.C. et al
as 2:2012cv02662
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL SINGLETON
Defendant:
THE CRIMINAL SYSTEMS OF N.J., S.C. and THE P.T.S. EXTRADITION COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Singleton v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, The
as 2:2011cv00676
Defendant:
South Carolina Department of Corrections, The, Kirkland R&E Institute and Warden Mackey
Plaintiff:
Michael Singleton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rumsey #222119 et al v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2010cv00880
Plaintiff:
Charles Earnest Rumsey #222119, Jr. , Herschel R. Davis #163765, Jr. , Steven D. Cohrs #156447 and others
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Mary Berghuis, Carole Aardsma and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rumsey Jr. et al v. Michigan Department of Corrections CASE TRANSFERRED
as 2:2010cv12487
Plaintiff:
Charles E Rumsey Jr. , Herschel R Davis Jr. , Steven D. Cohrs and others
Defendant:
Michigan Department of Corrections, Mary Berghuis, Carole Aardsma and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Singleton v. VA. Dept. of Corrections (Halifax Corr. Unit #23) et al
as 7:2008cv00349
Plaintiff:
John Michael Singleton
Defendant:
VA. Dept. of Corrections (Halifax Corr. Unit #23) and VA. Dept. of Corrections Food Services
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Michael Singleton v. P. Vasquez
as 5:2008cv00359
Plaintiff:
Michael Singleton
Defendant:
P Vasquez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Forma Pauperis Denial
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.
