Cases 31 - 40 of 98,389
(PC) Hill v. CDC
as 2:2024cv01607
Plaintiff:
Derrick Hill
Defendant:
California Department of Correction
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wiggins v. Oneal et al
as 6:2024cv01039
Plaintiff:
Frederick C. Wiggins, Jr
Defendant:
Melavan Oneal and Florida Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Michael Grace v. Alamance County
as 24-6538
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JERMAINE GRACE
Defendant:
ALAMANCE COUNTY, GRAHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICER CROSS and others
Banks v. Lumpkin
as 24-40406
Petitioner:
Danny Lee Banks
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Garcia v. Lumpkin
as 24-40405
Petitioner:
Antonio A. Garcia
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Anthony Woodridge v. Cook County Department of Corrections, et al
as 24-1968
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY WOODRIDGE
Defendant:
COOK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, G. MOORE and SEAN JONES
Jeffrey Akard v. Mark Sevier, et al
as 24-1971
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY AKARD
Defendant:
MARK R. SEVIER, Warden, COMMISSIONER OF THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC and others
Randle v. Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department et al
as 3:2024cv02099
Plaintiff:
Ramello Randle
Defendant:
Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department, Beltran, Jensen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cook v. Yetman et al
as 4:2024cv00776
Plaintiff:
Donald R. Cook
Defendant:
Officer M. Yetman, A. Shumate and St. Francois County Sheriffs Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BURKE v. DUGAN et al
as 3:2024cv06672
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY BURKE
Defendant:
STEPHANIE L. DUGAN, DETECTIVE SERGEANT KEITH FINKELSTEIN, P.O. W. SABIN, JR. and others
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.
