Cases 11 - 20 of 64
May v. Department of Health and Human Services et al
as 2:2020cv01795
Defendant:
Department of Health and Human Services, Wisconsin Womens Resource Center Manager, Matthew Butkiewitz and others
Plaintiff:
Edith Mae May
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Umhey v. Derrick et al
as 1:2020cv00079
Defendant:
Department of Corrections, Annamae Seigfried Derrick, Officer Kveseth and others
Plaintiff:
Melissa Ann Umhey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davidson v. Washington Corrections Center for Women et al
as 3:2019cv06134
Defendant:
Moore, CHI Franciscan, Washington State Department of Corrections and others
Plaintiff:
Terie Sue Davidson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wilks v. Chowchilla Women Facility
as 5:2019cv07469
Defendant:
Chowchilla Women Facility
Plaintiff:
Letha Pearl Wilks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROBINSON v. FITZEK et al
as 1:2019cv03145
Defendant:
MICHAEL FITZEK, INDIANA WOMEN'S PRISON and NICK JOHNSON
Plaintiff:
RUTH ROBINSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Howell v. Emerge et al
as 1:2019cv11043
Defendant:
MPCH, Aubrey Graham, Common Purpose and others
Plaintiff:
Curtis Howell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Bulla v. Gonzalez et al
as 6:2018cv01533
Defendant:
Corizon, Carlos Gonzalez and Florida Women's Reception Center
Plaintiff:
Sandy J. Bulla
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bulla v. Gonzalez et al
as 5:2018cv00497
Defendant:
Corizon, Carlos Gonzalez and Florida Women's Reception Center
Plaintiff:
Sandy J. Bulla
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CANTERBURY v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, et al.
as 1:2018cv01256
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, INDIANA WOMENS PRISON, DEKURF and others
Plaintiff:
BRANDI JO ELLEN CANTERBURY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
FLOOD v. NC CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION FOR WOMEN
as 1:2017cv01160
Plaintiff:
LAURA FLOOD
Defendant:
NC CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION FOR WOMEN
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.
