Cases 31 - 40 of 1,578
PARSONS v. DOE et al
as 1:2024cv00123
Plaintiff:
DANIELLE BLAINE PARSONS
Defendant:
JOHN DOE, STAFF: MR. BULLARDS, MR. RANSOME and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Huff v. Bullis et al
as 1:2024cv00053
Plaintiff:
Peter D. Huff
Defendant:
Brian Bullis, John Doe, FNU Biggerstaff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Parsons v. Director N.C. D.P.S. et al
as 5:2024ct03039
Plaintiff:
Daniel B. Parsons
Defendant:
Director N.C. D.P.S., Ms. La'Floor, Todd Ishee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Avent v. Wind et al
as 5:2024ct03037
Plaintiff:
Antonio Santwan Avent
Defendant:
John E. Wind, David Bradley, Samuel D. Langley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Roberts v. USA
as 1:2024cv00042
Petitioner:
John Paul Roberts
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Oxendine v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv00129
Plaintiff:
Christopher M. Oxendine
Defendant:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., H. Lang, Jane Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WOODBERRY v. MICHAEL et al
as 1:2024cv00093
Plaintiff:
MANDRAIL JAMAR WOODBERRY
Defendant:
JUDGE MICHAEL, ADA JOHN BANDLE, M. ODOM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SPRAUVE v. UNNAMED OFFICIALS
as 1:2024cv00092
Plaintiff:
JOHN C. SPRAUVE
Defendant:
UNNAMED OFFICIALS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Durant v. USA
as 3:2024cv00073
Petitioner:
John Paul Durant
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Rollins v. State of North Carolina Highway Patrol Officers
as 1:2024cv00018
Plaintiff:
Adam Roy Rollins
Defendant:
State of North Carolina Highway Patrol Officers, John Doe #1 and John Doe #2
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.
