Cases 1 - 10 of 404
PRUDEN et al v. DAVIS
as 3:2024cv00101
Plaintiff:
MYRON S. PRUDEN, MARK C.O. COOK, SHANE C. HENDRICK and others
Defendant:
W. DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harrell v. Gaughan
as 3:2024cv01432
Plaintiff:
Quinyatte J. Harrell
Defendant:
James P. Gaughan, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harrell v. Martinez et al
as 3:2024cv03213
Plaintiff:
Eshawn M. Harrell
Defendant:
Officer Martinez and Officer Montenegra
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRELL v. PAYNE et al
as 3:2024cv00082
Plaintiff:
QUINYATTE JARMAINE HARRELL
Defendant:
PAYNE and ASHLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cobbs v. Harrell et al
as 5:2024ct03106
Plaintiff:
Rodney Elroy Cobbs
Defendant:
Richard K. Harrell and Ricardo Jensen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HARRELL v. IRWIN et al
as 1:2024cv00063
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY B. HARRELL
Defendant:
RANDY IRWIN and RESTRICTED HOUSING UNIT OFFICERS AND MEDICAL EMPLOYEES AT SCI FOREST
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
David Patterson v. David Spence
as 24-6205
Plaintiff:
DAVID A. PATTERSON
Defendant:
DAVID SPENCE, JUDGE HARRELL, DALLAS ROSE and others
HARRELL v. IRWIN et al
as 2:2024cv00860
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY B. HARRELL
Defendant:
RANDY IRWIN and RESTRICTED HOUSING UNIT OFFICERS AND MEDICAL EMPLOYEES AT SCI FOREST
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harrel F. Braddy v. White et al
as 1:2023cv24378
Plaintiff:
Harrel F. Braddy
Defendant:
Officer D. White, Corporal M. Rodriguez, Officer McFadden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State Prisoner Civil Rights
Harrell et al v. Wagstaffe et al
as 3:2023cv05120
Plaintiff:
Eshawn Maurice Harrell and Adrian Dewitt Marcel Watson
Defendant:
Stephen M. Wagstaffe, F. Cardenas and Jenna L. Barton
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.
