Cases 11 - 20 of 22
TYLER v. ELLIS et al
as 2:2018cv00155
Defendant:
AMANDA BENSON, OFFICER BROOKS, OFFICER CARRILLO and others
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER C. TYLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TYLER v. KIELUR et al
as 2:2017cv00545
Defendant:
JOE KIELUR and UNNAMED EMPLOYEE
Miscellaneou:
PUTNAMVILLE CF (Court Use Only)
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER C. TYLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tyler v. Spartanburg County Jail Medical Department
as 2:2015cv04959
Plaintiff:
James C Tyler
Defendant:
Spartanburg County Jail Medical Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tyler v. Chesapeake Correctional Center et al
as 1:2014cv01061
Plaintiff:
Sherman C. Tyler
Defendant:
W. Taylor and Chesapeake Correctional Center Medical Department Medical Staff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Toscani v. Drago et al
as 8:2012cv03244
Plaintiff:
Nico Coty Toscani
Defendant:
Paul C Drago, John B Mcree, John B Tomarchio and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Lepeska Jr. v. Florida Department of Corrections et al
as 6:2011cv01105
Plaintiff:
Richard Kenneth Lepeska Jr.
Defendant:
Florida Department of Corrections, K. Minton, S. Moizuddin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Douglas v. Maynard et al
as 8:2011cv00255
Plaintiff:
Eugene Douglas, Jr.
Defendant:
Gary D. Maynard, Dept of Public Safety and Correctional Services, J Michael Stouffer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Reginald Tyler v. Adam
as 11-15227
Petitioner - Appellant:
REGINALD C. TYLER
Respondent - Appellee:
ADAMS, Warden
Tyler v. Adams
as 3:2009cv04225
Petitioner:
Reginald C. Tyler
Respondent:
Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tyler v. Adams
as 1:2009cv01517
Petitioner:
Reginald C. Tyler
Respondent:
Adams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
