Cases 11 - 20 of 51
PHILLIPS et al v. EDMONDS et al
as 1:2022cv02184
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. PHILLIPS
Defendant:
REAGAL, EDMONDS, A. SHAW and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PRINTUP v. VANIHEL et al
as 2:2022cv00380
Plaintiff:
DARIUS PRINTUP
Defendant:
FRANK VANIHEL, K. VINARDI, CHRISTOPHER HOLCOMB and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TOWNSEND v. KEYES et al
as 2:2022cv00337
Plaintiff:
ANTONIO D. TOWNSEND
Defendant:
KEYES, LEFTLER, SIMMERMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
THURMAN v. HENDRIX et al
as 2:2022cv00262
Plaintiff:
JAVIER SAVIONNE THURMAN
Defendant:
JAY HENDRIX, C. HOLCOMB, KEYS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SEABROOKS v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA, et al
as 2:2022cv00228
Plaintiff:
KEREL L. SEABROOKS
Defendant:
WEXFORD OF INDIANA, CENTURION OF INDIANA, LLC, JANE DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
OGLE v. WEXFORD HEALTH SERVICES et al
as 2:2022cv00169
Plaintiff:
BRYAN A. OGLE
Defendant:
WEXFORD HEALTH SERVICES, RICHARD BROWN, NAVEEN RAJOLI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HICKINGBOTTOM v. HENDRIX et al
as 2:2022cv00038
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL D. HICKINGBOTTOM
Defendant:
JAY HENDRIX, HOLCOMB, TAWNI TEMPLETON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
KING v. BRANHAM et al
as 1:2021cv03008
Plaintiff:
ROGER S. KING, JR.
Defendant:
MIKE BRANHAM, ANDREW VERBOCHT, JOHN COCHRAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HARRIS v. LITTLEJOHN et al
as 2:2021cv00424
Plaintiff:
NATHANIEL HARRIS
Defendant:
FRANK LITTLEJOHN, RICHARD BROWN, ANDREAN MASON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCQUAY v. GILMORE et al
as 2:2021cv00182
Defendant:
STEVEN C. CARPENTER, AMBER SENDMYER, RANDALL VANVLEET and others
Plaintiff:
LEONARD B. MCQUAY
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.
