Cases 11 - 20 of 221
EDWARDS v. WILSON et al
as 5:2023cv00159
Plaintiff:
JAMES EDWARDS
Defendant:
WILSON, BERRY, CLARK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BOYD v. BAILEY et al
as 5:2023cv00222
Plaintiff:
DAVIOUS MARQUES BOYD
Defendant:
PAUL BAILEY and JOHN AND OR JANE DOES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MCCURTY v. STATE OF GEORGIA et al
as 5:2023cv00059
Plaintiff:
DREXEL MCCURTY
Defendant:
STATE OF GEORGIA, COMMISSIONER TIMOTHY C WARD, aGOVERNOR BRIAN P KEMP and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Olsson v. Malis et al
as 1:2022cv06575
Plaintiff:
Paul Olsson
Defendant:
Richard Malis, Jeff Pharris, Daniel Hardy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brooks v. Keller
as 1:2022cv01233
Plaintiff:
Shawn Brooks
Defendant:
Sgt Keller, Ryan Kuepper and John and/or Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Marcum v. Capp et al
as 2:2022cv02160
Plaintiff:
Ronald Marcum
Defendant:
Sarah Capp, Abby Yarbrough, David Saxon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mark v. Sabish et al
as 2:2022cv01154
Plaintiff:
Jonathon M Mark
Defendant:
Mr Sabish and John and/or Jane Doe(s)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HOBBS v. DOOLY STATE PRISON et al
as 5:2022cv00283
Plaintiff:
QUADRAY HOBBS
Defendant:
DOOLY STATE PRISON, UNKNOWN LT, UNKNOWN SERGEANT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
GOOLSBY v. JUDKINS et al
as 4:2022cv00162
Plaintiff:
JASON RICHARD GOOLSBY
Defendant:
Judkins, SGT Stone, JOHN AND OR JANE DOES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BAYSE v. WARD et al
as 1:2022cv00024
Plaintiff:
ROBBIN AMANDA BAYSE and Robert Bayse
Defendant:
Timothy Ward, Dr. Sharon Lewis, JAVEL JACKSON 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.
