Cases 21 - 30 of 219
Frazer v. Mullins, RN et al
as 5:2023cv00193
Plaintiff:
John J. Frazer
Defendant:
P Mullins, RN, Amanda Miller, Crystal Yates and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McNichols v. Armark Corporation et al
as 0:2023cv00073
Plaintiff:
Charles Raymond McNichols
Defendant:
Armark Corporation, Theresa Gutett and Adam Bare
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Adams v. Garrett et al
as 5:2023cv00164
Plaintiff:
Zayer A. Adams
Defendant:
M. Garrett, Evan B. Lynch, Paul J. Spicer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McNichols v. Armark Corp. et al
as 0:2023cv00062
Plaintiff:
Charles Raymond McNichols
Defendant:
Armark Corp., Theresa Gullett and Adam Bare
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dixon v. Joyner et al
as 7:2023cv00030
Plaintiff:
Dijon T. Dixon
Defendant:
Hector Joyner, Gary Rose, E. A. Irwin and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Mart v. Parrott et al
as 5:2023cv00017
Plaintiff:
Bobby Mart, Jr.
Defendant:
Adam Parrott, Lauren Massey, Scott Jordan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Schrimer v. Powell County Detention Center et al
as 5:2023cv00004
Plaintiff:
Tyler Schrimer and Tyler Schirmer
Defendant:
Powell County Detention Center, Powell County Sheriff Department, George Nester and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Adams v. Garrett et al
as 5:2022cv00168
Plaintiff:
Zayer A. Adams
Defendant:
M. Garrett, Evan B. Lynch, Paul J. Spicer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barker v. McKenzie
as 3:2022cv00613
Petitioner:
Adam Anthony Barker
Respondent:
Warden Shawn McKenzie
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson v. Jackson et al
as 6:2022cv00210
Plaintiff:
Adam Jackson
Defendant:
Malachi Jackson and Grant Jones
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.
