Cases 71 - 80 of 121
Johnson v. Doe et al
as 5:2014cv03045
Plaintiff:
DeRoyale A. Johnson
Defendant:
Dennis Doe, Christina Smith and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Winkel (ID 103141) v. Hammond et al
as 5:2014cv03032
Plaintiff:
Robert W. Winkel
Defendant:
Geoffery Hammond, Dilip Patel, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gadbury (ID 93743) v. Bush et al
as 5:2014cv03027
Plaintiff:
Ricky A. Gadbury
Defendant:
Dean Bush, Chris Weis, John Doe (1) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Counce v. Wolting et al
as 5:2013cv03199
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Counce
Defendant:
Ryan Wolting, Kansas State Highway Patrol, Tracy L. Ploutz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Parrish (ID 25121) v. Larned Correctional Facility et al
as 5:2013cv03176
Petitioner:
Daniel Joseph Parrish
Respondent:
Larned Correctional Facility, Kansas Department of Corrections and John Doe Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sanders v. Ketron et al
as 5:2013cv03165
Plaintiff:
Emmanuel Sanders
Defendant:
John M. Ketron, John Doe (1), John Doe (2) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Salary (ID 96349) v. Cline et al
as 5:2013cv03147
Plaintiff:
Mark T. Salary
Defendant:
Sam Cline, (fnu) Potter, (fnu) Nunez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ochlech v. Mason et al
as 5:2013cv03138
Plaintiff:
Charles William Ochlech, III
Defendant:
(fnu) Mason, K. Aulepp, J. Blevins and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Winkel (ID 103141) v. Hammond et al
as 5:2013cv03103
Plaintiff:
Robert Winkel
Defendant:
Geoffery Hammond, Dilip Patel, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stine v. Laird et al
as 5:2013cv03101
Plaintiff:
Mikeal Glenn Stine
Defendant:
Paul Laird, Amber Nelson, Gordon Harpe and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other 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.
