Cases 11 - 20 of 20
Amaro v. Johnson et al
as 1:2015cv00973
Plaintiff:
Eric Amaro
Defendant:
J.R. Johnson, Robert Coupe, Neal Kirk and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Drumgo v. Little et al
as 1:2014cv01136
Plaintiff:
De Shawn Drumgo
Defendant:
Mike Little, Patrick Iwaskiewicz, Madeline Lynch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Neal v. Pierce et al
as 1:2014cv00141
Petitioner:
Michael Neal
Respondent:
David Pierce and Joseph R. Biden, III
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Epperson v. Phelps et al
as 1:2010cv00738
Plaintiff:
Kevin S. Epperson
Defendant:
Perry Phelps, Chaplain Frank Pennell, Henry and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Rainier v. Delaware Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2010cv00498
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey M. Rainier, Sr.
Defendant:
Delaware Department of Corrections, Carl Danberg, Richard Kearney and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Gordon v. Beckles et al
as 1:2009cv00637
Plaintiff:
Thomas Gordon
Defendant:
Beckles, Neal, Thomas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Anker v. Neal et al
as 1:2008cv00203
Petitioner:
Daniel J. Anker
Respondent:
Elizabeth Neal and Attorney General of State of Delaware
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Blake v. Neal et al
as 1:2008cv00072
Plaintiff:
Raymond E. Blake
Defendant:
Douglas Neal, Jay J. King, William Baker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Price v. Carroll et al
as 1:2007cv00380
Plaintiff:
Lou Garden Price, Sr.
Defendant:
Tom Carroll, Elizabeth Burris, D. Pierce and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Booze v. Correctional Medical Services et al
as 1:2007cv00082
Plaintiff:
William H. Booze, IV
Defendant:
Correctional Medical Services, Correctional Medical Services, Dale Rogers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
