Cases 61 - 70 of 52,180
Bixler v. Department of Corrections et al
as 0:2024cv00062
Plaintiff:
Kagan Cole Bixler
Defendant:
Department of Corrections and David Green
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Braun et al
as 1:2024cv00122
Plaintiff:
Sheldon George Davis
Defendant:
Colby Braun and North Dakota Department of Correction and Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Derek Sprouse v. Virginia Director of Prisons
as 24-6583
Petitioner:
DEREK SPROUSE
Respondent:
VIRGINIA DIRECTOR OF PRISONS, Department of Corrections
Corey Johnson v. A. Walker
as 24-6584
Plaintiff:
COREY E. JOHNSON
Defendant:
A. WALKER, MR. BELL, R. LANGFORD and others
Machelle Pearson, et al v. MDOC, et al
as 24-1526
Plaintiff:
MACHELLE PEARSON, MARIA SHELDON, KESHUNA ABCUMBY and others
Defendant:
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, HEIDI E. WASHINGTON, SHAWN BREWER and others
Machelle Pearson, et al v. MDOC, et al
as 24-1528
Plaintiff:
MACHELLE PEARSON, MARIA SHELDON, KESHUNA ABCUMBY and others
Defendant:
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CARMEN MCINTYRE and JAMES BLESSMAN
Rickey Smith v. Secretary, Department of Corrections, et al
as 24-11988
Petitioner:
RICKEY SMITH
Respondent:
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL
George Martin v. Commissioner, Alabama Department of Corrections
as 24-11986
Petitioner:
GEORGE MARTIN
Respondent:
COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Jones v. State of California et al
as 4:2024cv03594
Plaintiff:
Malcolm Jones
Defendant:
State of California, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation (CDCR), Ralph Diaz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Houle v. Bangert et al
as 3:2024cv00121
Plaintiff:
Gilbert John Houle
Defendant:
Emma Lucille Bangert, Kristina Braaten, Altru Hospital and others
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.
