Cases 31 - 40 of 64
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv01132
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Massey et al v. Utah Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2016cv00956
Plaintiff:
Robert J. Massey and Jacqulyn Massey
Defendant:
Utah Department of Corrections, Rollin Cook, Daniel B. Harman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cook v. Hobbins et al
as 2:2016cv00840
Defendant:
Debra F. Hobbins , Mark B. Steinagel , Francine A. Giani and others
Plaintiff:
Monica C. Cook
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343
Brown v. Canyons School District et al
as 2:2016cv00270
Plaintiff:
Thomas Brown
Defendant:
Canyons School District and John Carrell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Senecal v. Kanab City et al
as 2:2015cv00771
Plaintiff:
Robert Alan Senecal
Defendant:
Kanab City, Nina Laycook, James G. Sorensen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Taylor, Dillon the Estate of et al v. Salt Lake City et al
as 2:2015cv00769
Plaintiff:
Taylor, Dillon the Estate of , Cody Taylor , Jerrail Taylor and others
Defendant:
Salt Lake City, City of South Salt Lake, Salt Lake County and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv00039
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Swallow v. South Jordan City et al
as 2:2014cv00881
Plaintiff:
Christopher Swallow
Defendant:
South Jordan City, South Jordan City Office of the City Attorney, South Jordan City Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv00116
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Martinez v. State of Utah et al
as 2:2013cv00704
Plaintiff:
Walter A. Martinez
Defendant:
State of Utah, Gary Herbert, John Swallow and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
