Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Sides v. Miller
as 1:2024cv00545
Plaintiff:
Anthony Sides
Defendant:
Correctional Officer Miller
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Negron v. Sam et al
as 1:2023cv01913
Plaintiff:
Jerry Negron
Defendant:
Ms. Sam, Mr. Able, Sgt. Schiller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lee v. Mason et al
as 4:2023cv00799
Plaintiff:
Taji Lee
Defendant:
B. Mason, Corrections Officer Miller, Corrections Officer Young and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Lee v. Mason et al
as 4:2023cv00793
Plaintiff:
Taji Lee
Defendant:
B. Mason, Correctional Officer Miller, Corrections Officer Young and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Iverson v. Reese et al
as 4:2020cv01269
Defendant:
Corrections Officer Miller, John Doe, Captain John Doe and others
Plaintiff:
David Iverson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sinkler v. Clark et al
as 1:2019cv01327
Plaintiff:
Freddie E. Sinkler
Defendant:
Block Officer Miller, Officer Danner, Security Robert Lucas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Miller et al
as 1:2018cv02286
Defendant:
City of Carlisle, Officer Kenndy, Officer Miller and others
Plaintiff:
Damion G. Davis
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Blount v. Brook et al
as 1:2008cv01732
Plaintiff:
Tony Blount
Defendant:
Police Officer Brook, Police Officer Miller and Lower Paxton Township Police Department
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
CRAIG v. LT. BOYLAN et al
as 3:2008cv00046
Plaintiff:
DEON E. CRAIG
Defendant:
LT. BOYLAN, SUPT. ROZUM and CORR. OFFICER MILLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
CRAIG v. LT. BOYLAN et al
as 3:2007cv00338
Plaintiff:
DEON EMANUEL CRAIG
Defendant:
LT. BOYLAN, CORR. OFFICER MILLER and CORR. OFFICER CONN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
