Cases 51 - 60 of 278
HAWTHORNE v. BRYANT et al
as 1:2019cv04139
Defendant:
T. COLLINS, ANDREA K. FULTON, WEXFORD OF INDIANA and others
Plaintiff:
TERRENCE HAWTHORNE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Dickerson et al
as 4:2019cv03876
Defendant:
Lietuenant Dylan R Cooley, Tanish Sorkpor-Tran, Estelle Unit Grievance Dept. and others
Plaintiff:
James L Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bowen v. Ryan et al
as 2:2019cv05195
Defendant:
Jolie Roberts, Benjamin Schmid, K Switzer and others
Plaintiff:
Conrad Lonnie Bowen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Diaz et al
as 4:2019cv05685
Defendant:
Ralph Diaz, K. Hoffman, B. D. Min and others
Plaintiff:
James David Williams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
John Doe v. Starks et al
as 2:2019cv01446
Defendant:
Charles Korus, RJ Starks and Richard Geer
Plaintiff:
Thomas W.S. Richey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tucker #287524 v. Bell et al
as 4:2019cv00431
Defendant:
Unknown Valenzuela, Unknown Monson, Arizona Department of Corrections and others
Plaintiff:
Tony A Tucker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SHULER v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
as 1:2019cv02343
Plaintiff:
MCALLEN HOSPITAL, L.P., MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE GROUP, INC., SARASOTA DOCTORS HOSPITAL, INC. and others
Petitioner:
LAMONT DERRICK SHULER
Respondent:
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Francis v. Ryan et al
as 4:2019cv00393
Defendant:
Arizona, State of, Britagne Richey, Kimberlee Switzer and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Francis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
RICHEY v. RIVERBEND MEDICAL et al
as 5:2019cv00309
Defendant:
DR SMUEL RAYAPATI and RIVERBEND MEDICAL
Plaintiff:
CHARLES EDWARD RICHEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richey v. Riverbend Medical et al
as 1:2019cv03389
Defendant:
Dr. Smuel Rayapati and Riverbend Medical
Plaintiff:
Charles Edward Richey
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.
