Cases 41 - 50 of 625
Colavito v. Diehl et al
as 3:2022cv00817
Petitioner:
Anthony M. Colavito
Defendant:
William Diehl, A. Joyce and Ms. Rudacill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cox v. Clarke
as 3:2022cv00800
Petitioner:
Anthony Ray Cox
Respondent:
Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LoRusso v. Wal-Mart
as 3:2022cv00766
Plaintiff:
Michael Anthony LoRusso
Defendant:
Wal-Mart
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Payne v. Davis et al
as 7:2022cv00710
Plaintiff:
Tony Anthony Payne, Sr.
Defendant:
Ms. Lisa Davis, Practioner Nurse, Medical Staff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Watkins v. Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail
as 7:2022cv00705
Plaintiff:
Anthony Lorenzo Watkins
Defendant:
Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Elliott v. Commonwealth of Virginia/ Chesapeake Circuit Court
as 3:2022cv00743
Plaintiff:
Anthony W. Elliott
Defendant:
Commonwealth of Virginia/ Chesapeake Circuit Court
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LoRusso v. Smithfield Foods Inc.
as 3:2022cv00686
Plaintiff:
Michael Anthony LoRusso
Defendant:
Smithfield Foods Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carpenter v. Clarke
as 7:2022cv00480
Petitioner:
Michael Anthony Carpenter, Sr.
Respondent:
Harold W. Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hopkins v. Unknown
as 3:2022cv00548
Petitioner:
Anthony Shamel Hopkins
Respondent:
Unknown and Tony Darden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Daniels v. Gaither et al
as 3:2022cv00526
Plaintiff:
Joseph Anthony Daniels
Defendant:
Michael Gaither, Vincent Gore and B. Alexander
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.
