Cases 31 - 40 of 55
Daniels v. Doe 1 et al
as 6:2016cv06357
Plaintiff:
Willie Daniels
Defendant:
John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Holmes v. County of Monroe et al
as 6:2016cv06307
Plaintiff:
Tony C. Holmes
Defendant:
County of Monroe and City of Rochester
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Goodwin v. City of Rochester et al
as 1:2016cv00343
Plaintiff:
Daryl Goodwin
Defendant:
City of Rochester, Wilfredo Carbonel, Brandon Goater and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nelson v. City of Rochester et al
as 6:2016cv06104
Plaintiff:
James Nelson
Defendant:
City of Rochester , Sandra Doorley , Monroe County and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Nelson v. City of Rochester et al
as 6:2016cv06103
Plaintiff:
James Nelson
Defendant:
City of Rochester, Sandra Doorley, Monroe County and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Willis v. Rochester Police Department et al
as 6:2015cv06284
Plaintiff:
Otis B. Willis, Jr.
Defendant:
Rochester Police Department, City of Rochester - Mayor Lovely Warren, Sandra Doorley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McIntosh v. Reaves Jr. et al
as 6:2015cv06209
Plaintiff:
John A. McIntosh
Defendant:
Bing Reaves Jr., City of Rochester, New York, Rochester Police Department and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Santiago v. The City Of Rochester et al
as 6:2014cv06719
Plaintiff:
Carlos A. Santiago
Defendant:
The City Of Rochester, The City of Rochester Police Force and Shawn Jordan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harmon v. City of Rochester et al
as 6:2014cv06562
Plaintiff:
Phyllis Harmon
Defendant:
City of Rochester, Rochester Police Department, Brian Marone and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Millspaugh et al
as 6:2014cv06249
Plaintiff:
Damien Thomas
Defendant:
Officer Millspaugh, Robert Shoemaker and City of Rochester
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.
