Cases 61 - 70 of 522
Pagaling v. Napa State Hospital et al
as 5:2022cv02202
Plaintiff:
Michael Joseph Pagaling
Defendant:
Napa State Hospital, John Simms, Almira and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Simms v. Matthiesen et al
as 2:2022cv00331
Plaintiff:
Jesus M Simms
Defendant:
B Matthiesen, Inspector Dobson and John/Jane Does
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MEYERS v. HAMPTON et al
as 1:2022cv00150
Plaintiff:
DAVID MEYERS
Defendant:
DHO REGINA HAMPTON, SGT. MS. NEALLY, CAPTAIN MR. COVINGTON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Simms v. Dobson et al
as 2:2022cv00185
Plaintiff:
Jesus M Simms
Defendant:
Inspector Dobson, Milwaukee County Sheriffs Department, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Shirley v. Simms et al
as 3:2022cv00091
Plaintiff:
Thomas Shirley
Defendant:
Dr. Amanda Simms, Michael Parris, Dr. Emily Olroid and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MEYERS v. GAUL
as 1:2022cv00119
Plaintiff:
DAVID MEYERS
Defendant:
MS. GAUL, LT. MS. LOCKLEAR, THE SCOTLAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Simms v. Warden, Grafton Correctional Institution
as 2:2022cv00474
Petitioner:
Timothy Simms
Respondent:
Warden, Grafton Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Simms v. Edwards
as 1:2022cv00028
Plaintiff:
Dejwan Simms
Defendant:
Edwards
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CROSS v. STEVEN et al
as 1:2021cv00225
Petitioner:
DARRELL D CROSS
Respondent:
SHERIFF CHRISTOPHER STEVEN and DAVIDSON SIMMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Simms-Lewis v. Tee et al
as 1:2021cv02830
Plaintiff:
Raymond E. Simms-Lewis
Defendant:
Officer Ms. Tee, Warden Obello, Governor Larry Hogan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
