Cases 41 - 50 of 155
WILLIAMS v. WILEY et al
as 1:2023cv00139
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY H WILLIAMS
Defendant:
WILEY, SHARON, DURR and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
THOMAS v. KOLEHOUSE et al
as 2:2022cv00578
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ANTHONY THOMAS
Defendant:
MICHAEL ANTHONY KOLEHOUSE and TROMLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HALL v. ATTABERRY
as 2:2022cv00503
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY RAMON HALL
Defendant:
ATTABERRY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
MARTIN v. VANIHEL et al
as 2:2022cv00470
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY MARTIN
Defendant:
FRANK VANIHEL, KEVIN GILMORE, THOMAS WELLINGTON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BROWN, HINES, WILSON, DOUGLAS v. CARTER et al
as 1:2022cv02048
Plaintiff:
RODNEY BROWN, ANTWAN HINES, HOWARD HARRIS and others
Defendant:
ERIC J. HOLCOMB, ROBERT E. CARTER JR., DAUSS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
FLOWERS v. EVANSVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 3:2022cv00113
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY FLOWERS
Defendant:
EVANSVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, MIDTOWN HOSPITAL, TAYLOR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MACK, THOMAS, SAMELTON, STEWART AND GIBSON v. CARTER et al
as 1:2022cv01077
Plaintiff:
MONTERIO MACK, TERRY THOMAS, ISAIAH SAMELTON and others
Defendant:
ERIC J. HOLCOMB, ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., DR. DAUSS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STARR v. ANDREWS et al
as 2:2022cv00160
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY STARR
Defendant:
ANDREWS and J. LYTTLE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HACKETT v. FORESTER et al
as 1:2022cv00743
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY D. HACKETT
Defendant:
FORESTER, CREAR, OWADAI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STRONG v. HAMMOND
as 2:2021cv00477
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY STRONG
Defendant:
B. HAMMOND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
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.
