Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Due v. Ahmed et al
as 3:2023cv02431
Plaintiff:
Randall David Due
Defendant:
Faisal Vakil Ahmed, Mary A Noland, Syed Fateh Hyder and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
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
Jackson v. McCraw et al
as 3:2021cv50046
Defendant:
McCraw, Illinois Department of Corrections, Dixon Corr. Ctr. and others
Plaintiff:
Tony Jackson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bernard v. Illinois Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2020cv05343
Defendant:
Illinois Department of Corrections, Sherwin Miles, John Baldwin and others
Plaintiff:
Eric E. Bernard
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Illinois Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2020cv03150
Defendant:
Illinois Department of Corrections, SIU ENT, John Does and Jane Does Medical Dental and others
Plaintiff:
Wesley Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eby v. Okezie et al
as 1:2019cv08404
Defendant:
Nurse Amy, JOHN AND OR JANE DOES, Tina Temaras and others
Plaintiff:
Scott Eby
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bogan v. Baldwin et al
as 1:2019cv01286
Defendant:
McGruder, John Baldwin, John and/or Jane Does and others
Plaintiff:
Antonio M. Bogan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Denson v. DOES 1-11 et al
as 3:2017cv50382
Plaintiff:
Jerrell Denson
Defendant:
DOES 1-11, Tuell, Wexford Health Sources Inc, Agency and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Evans et al
as 1:2015cv06465
Plaintiff:
Dimitrius Thomas
Defendant:
Michael L. Evans, Scott S. Nodine, Semmister and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Cook County, IL et al
as 1:2012cv05036
Plaintiff:
Bruce Smith
Defendant:
Tom Dart, Aramark Food Services and John Doe or Jane Doe
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.
