Cases 1 - 10 of 29
Senty-Haugen v. Jesson et al
as 0:2023cv00033
Plaintiff:
Arthur Dale Senty-Haugen
Defendant:
Lucinda Jesson, Nancy Johnston, Dennis Benson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Benson v. Jesson et al
as 0:2022cv03059
Plaintiff:
Brandon Keith Benson
Defendant:
Lucinda Jesson, Nancy Johnston, Dennis Benson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Boots v. Johnson et al
as 0:2022cv01894
Plaintiff:
Bill M. Boots
Defendant:
Nathan Johnson, Kevin Carlson, Richard O'Brien and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Prouty v. All current and past Health Services Employee's Employed at DHS-MSOP et al
as 0:2021cv02457
Plaintiff:
Darrell D. Prouty
Defendant:
All current and past Health Services Employee's Employed at DHS-MSOP, Melissa Class, Sharon K. Autio and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Judah v. Ovsak et al
as 0:2021cv00618
Defendant:
Joseph Witz, Nicole Oachs, Terrance Kneisel and others
Plaintiff:
Willim Judah
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Miles v. Schiller et al
as 0:2019cv01914
Defendant:
John Does, Robert Rose, Shelby Hall and others
Plaintiff:
Gordon Miles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Boots v. Johnson et al
as 0:2017cv03923
Plaintiff:
Bill M. Boots
Defendant:
Nathan Johnson, Kevin Carlson, Richard O'Connor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wickner v. Department of Human Services et al
as 0:2017cv00792
Plaintiff:
Lance Wickner
Defendant:
Department of Human Services, Shelby R. Richardson, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wong v. Piper et al
as 0:2017cv00704
Plaintiff:
Matthew Wong
Defendant:
Emily Johnson Piper, Robert Rose, Brian Ninneman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Desjarlais v. Piper et al
as 0:2017cv00675
Plaintiff:
Lloyd Desjarlais
Defendant:
Emily Johnson Piper, Robert Rose, Brian Ninneman and others
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.
