Cases 11 - 20 of 42
Williams v. Ishee et al
as 1:2023cv00214
Plaintiff:
Andre David Williams
Defendant:
Todd E. Ishee, Ben Carver and Keven R. Chung
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TYLER v. SMITH et al
as 1:2023cv00650
Plaintiff:
XAVAR TYLER
Defendant:
DAVID B. SMITH, THE FORSYTH COUNTY L.E.D.C, ANTON THURMAN MCALLISTER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Friday v. Carver et al
as 5:2023ct03140
Plaintiff:
Tevin Damato Friday
Defendant:
Warden Ben Carver, Asst. Warden Cothran, Caroline Watson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NEAL v. ANDERSON
as 1:2023cv00285
Petitioner:
GLENN WHICKER NEAL, JR.
Respondent:
BEN ANDERSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
NEAL v. ANDERSON
as 1:2023cv00284
Petitioner:
GLENN WHICKER NEAL, JR.
Respondent:
BEN ANDERSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ANDERSON v. LEE et al
as 1:2023cv00111
Plaintiff:
ALBERT MARQUAVIOUSLAMA ANDERSON and ALBERT MARQUAVIOUSLAMAR ANDERSON
Defendant:
LEE, SALISBURY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, HONEYCUTT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cheeks v. Carver
as 3:2022cv00692
Petitioner:
Thomas Allen Cheeks
Respondent:
Ben Carver
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ANDERSON v. LEE et al
as 1:2022cv01097
Plaintiff:
ALBERT ANDERSON and ALBERT MARQUAVIOUSLAMAR ANDERSON
Defendant:
LEE, SALISBURY CORR. INST., RITHIE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Crump v. Carver et al
as 3:2022cv00541
Plaintiff:
Ramar Dion Benjamin Crump
Defendant:
Ben Carver, Saint T. Tapp, David E. Cothron and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Torres v. Coffee et al
as 1:2021cv00157
Defendant:
FNU Coffee, FNU Ingram and Ben Carver
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Anthony Lee Torres
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.
