Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Scroggs v. Compton et al
as 5:2024cv00135
Plaintiff:
Seth Reed Scroggs
Defendant:
J. Compton, R.A. Crow and Mooresville Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MCGRAUGH v. ALEEM et al
as 1:2022cv00442
Plaintiff:
SETH AARON MCGRAUGH
Defendant:
R A ALEEM, MULTIPLE CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS and CITY OF GRAHAM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CARRINGTON v. NEYHART et al
as 1:2021cv00671
Plaintiff:
THEODORE MACON CARRINGTON, JR.
Defendant:
ATTORNEY SETH A. NEYHART and U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Boyd v. Bowler et al
as 5:2019ct03205
Defendant:
Eric D. Goulian, Seth M. Wood, James E. Gates and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel Patrick Boyd
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Dalton v. Liles et al
as 5:2019cv00083
Defendant:
FNU Vargas, Troy Miller, Seth Stevenson and others
Plaintiff:
Curtis Luther Dalton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brown-Bey v. Hooks et al
as 1:2018cv00015
Plaintiff:
Eddricco Li'shaun Brown-Bey
Defendant:
Erik A. Hooks, State of North Carolina, Seth Banks and others
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
Brown v. Wiseman et al
as 5:2018ct03011
Plaintiff:
Eddricco L. Brown
Defendant:
Ricky V. Wiseman, Stanley E. Davis, Gary N. Gavenus and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Armistead v. Bowen et al
as 5:2017ct03281
Plaintiff:
James Gregory Armistead
Defendant:
Jennie Bowen, Timothy Ware, Roger Shackleford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
King v. Carlson et al
as 5:2016ct03348
Plaintiff:
Alex Ohara King
Defendant:
E.V. Carlson and Seth Parmelee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Butcher v. North Carolina Board of Probation and Parole et al
as 5:2013ct03057
Plaintiff:
Horace Butcher
Defendant:
North Carolina Board of Probation and Parole, Moose Butler, Lt. Melvin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 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.
