Cases 31 - 40 of 57
Bradley Maxwell v. Harold Clarke
as 13-7056
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BRADLEY MAXWELL
Defendant - Appellee:
HAROLD CLARKE, JAMES PARKS, GEORGE HINKLE and others
DePaola v. Virginia Department Of Corrections et al
as 7:2012cv00592
Defendant:
Harold Clarke, Mark Engelke, John Garman and others
Plaintiff:
Eric J. DePaola
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Department Of Corrections et al
as 7:2012cv00572
Defendant:
K. Campbell, Department Of Corrections, J. E. Glover and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Anthony Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Maxwell v. Clarke et al
as 7:2012cv00477
Defendant:
J.W. Carico, Harold Clarke, B.D. Collins and others
Plaintiff:
Bradley Maxwell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bayadi v. Mathena et al
as 7:2012cv00436
Plaintiff:
Hasan Bayadi
Defendant:
George Hinkle and Randall C. Mathena
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dodson v. Department of Correctional et al
as 8:2012cv02556
Plaintiff:
Melvin Cornnell Dodson
Defendant:
Department of Correctional, George Hinkle and Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Land v. Clarke et al
as 7:2012cv00354
Defendant:
Harold W. Clarke, L. Fleming, C. Hawks and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Ray Land
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Howard v. Pleasant et al
as 7:2012cv00321
Defendant:
M. Addington, Rebel Deel, C. Gilbert and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Pharaoh Howard
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Keystone v. Hinkle et al
as 7:2012cv00155
Defendant:
George Hinkle, Miss Looney and R.C. Mathena
Plaintiff:
Randall J. Keystone
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Alitzer v. Hinkle
as 7:2012cv00040
Plaintiff:
Frank Ervin Alitzer, Jr.
Defendant:
George Hinkle
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.
