Cases 21 - 30 of 72
Tripp v. Cook et al
as 4:2020cv04021
Defendant:
Jennifer Driski, Kyle Bender, Eugiene Regier and others
Plaintiff:
Kevin Christopher Micheal Tripp
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Meadows et al
as 4:2020cv04049
Defendant:
Ernest Meadows, Summit Food Services and Catering By Marlins
Plaintiff:
Charles Ray Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tripp v. Cook et al
as 4:2019cv04142
Defendant:
Health Service Staff, Larry Anderson, Kyle Bender and others
Plaintiff:
Kevin Christopher Micheal Tripp
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hansen v. South Dakota Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2019cv04019
Defendant:
Debra Eilers, Alejandro Reyes, South Dakota Department of Corrections and others
Plaintiff:
Jason Lane Hansen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cody v. Bowers et al
as 4:2019cv04026
Defendant:
Dennis Kaemingk, Dr. Kenra Ott, Steve Baker and others
Plaintiff:
William Cody
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Simpson v. Kaemingk et al
as 4:2018cv04133
Defendant:
Denise Bardwell, Unknown CBM Food Services Employees, Alejandro Reyes and others
Plaintiff:
Jesse Roy Simpson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fuller v. Leidholt
as 3:2018cv03011
Plaintiff:
Matthew P. Fuller
Defendant:
Sheriff Mike Leidholt, Hughes County Jail, United States Marshal Service and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wiseley v. Department of Social Services et al
as 5:2018cv05052
Defendant:
Pennington County States Attorneys Office and Department of Social Services
Plaintiff:
Michael Wiseley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ryan v. CBM Food Service et al
as 1:2018cv01009
Plaintiff:
John Richard Ryan, Jr.
Defendant:
CBM Food Service and Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Maday v. Dooley et al
as 4:2017cv04168
Plaintiff:
Stanley J. Maday
Defendant:
Bob Dooley, Dennis Kaemingk, Mary Carpenter and others
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.
