Cases 31 - 40 of 80
Mitchell v. Hickenlooper et al
as 1:2017cv00819
Plaintiff:
Merl Mitchell
Defendant:
John Hickenlooper, Rick Raemish, Tiano and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thompson #261144 v. Jaklevic et al
as 2:2016cv00252
Plaintiff:
Christopher Burnell Thompson #261144
Defendant:
Peter Jaklevic, Scott P. Hill-Kennedy, Marcee Purcell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ramirez v. Hickenlooper et al
as 1:2016cv02579
Plaintiff:
Luis Alfonso Solares Ramirez
Defendant:
John Hickenlooper, Rick Raemish, Tiano and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RAMIREZ v. HICKENLOOPER et al
as 1:2016cv01882
Plaintiff:
LUIS ALFONSO SOLARES RAMIREZ
Defendant:
JOHN HICKENLOOPER, RICK RAEMISH, TIANO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Burnell v. Briann et al
as 4:2016cv00610
Plaintiff:
Odell Burnell
Defendant:
Laura Briann, Cole and Parker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
US v. Terricious Brook
as 16-6004
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
TERRICIOUS BURNELL BROOKS, a/k/a Turkey
Deverick Scott v. Danny Burl, et al
as 15-3578
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Deverick Scott
Defendant:
Ray Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction and Arkansas Department of Correction
Defendant - Appellee:
Danny Burl, Warden, East Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC, Dexter Payne, Assistant Warden, East Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC, Todd Ball, Assistant Warden, East Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC and others
Anderson v. Dauphin County Adult Probation Office et al
as 3:2015cv00878
Plaintiff:
Warren D Anderson
Defendant:
Dauphin County Adult Probation Office, Dauphin County Sheriff's Department, Lower Paxton Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Houston v. Batiste et al
as 1:2015cv00633
Plaintiff:
Brent Burnell Houston
Defendant:
Batiste, Saucier, Dupre 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.
