Cases 21 - 30 of 61
DEBERRY v. COUNTY OF NORTHAMPTON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2017cv00795
Plaintiff:
CRYSTAL DEBERRY
Defendant:
COUNTY OF NORTHAMPTON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DANIEL S. KEEN, SCOTT M. GOLDY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Chiles v. Stephens
as 1:2016cv00533
Petitioner:
Danny Napolean Chiles
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Respondent:
William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cross v. Don Diva Magazine et al
as 1:2016cv01014
Plaintiff:
Thomas Cross
Defendant:
Don Diva Magazine, Kevin Chiles, Tiffany Chiles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Forrest v. Michael Overmyer, et al
as 15-2613
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL FORREST
Defendant:
MD ABRAHAM, MD AMANDA, MD JEFFREY BEARD and others
Chiles v. Stephens
as 6:2015cv00165
Petitioner:
Vince Vernard Chiles
Notice Only Party:
Laura Haney
Respondent:
William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Forrest v. Overmeyer et al
as 3:2014cv00934
Plaintiff:
Michael Forrest
Defendant:
Michael Overmeyer, Michael Tice, Lt. Murin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BRUCE v. ENNIS et al
as 1:2014cv00129
Plaintiff:
LAMONT BRUCE
Defendant:
PAUL ENNIS, JOHN CHILES, EDWARD HEBERLING and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ANGLE v. SMEAL et al
as 1:2013cv00190
Plaintiff:
BRYAN ANGLE, II
Defendant:
SHIRLEY MOORE SMEAL, DERINA VARNER, SAUERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
SALVADORE v. SAUER(S) et al
as 2:2013cv02703
Plaintiff:
GARCIA SALVADORE
Defendant:
D. SAUER(S), CHILES, KRUG and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dates v. Chiles et al
as 2:2013cv00780
Plaintiff:
Donna Dates
Defendant:
Cynthia Chiles and Gwendolyn Terrance
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.
