Cases 1 - 10 of 33
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01743
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Violation of Due Process and Equal Protection
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01719
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MERCADO v. SOUTHERLAND et al
as 1:2020cv00589
Defendant:
DEPUTY TEMPLE, DEPUTY WEST, SCOTT SOUTHERLAND and others
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C MERCADO and ANGELITO MERCADO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MERCADO v. MYERS et al
as 1:2019cv04976
Defendant:
TERRANCE HOLDERNESS, DUSTIN NEWLAND and MATT MYERS
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C MERCADO and ANGELITO C. MERCADO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MERCADO v. PERSON
as 1:2018cv03610
Defendant:
DR. MICHAEL PERSON and MICHAEL PERSON
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C MERCADO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MERCADO v. PARKS et al
as 1:2018cv02860
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C. MERCADO and ANGELITO MERCADO
Defendant:
SHELTON SGT., CHIPPER PARKS, OFFICER PIERCE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MERCADO v. PARKS et al
as 1:2018cv02598
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C. MERCADO and ANGELITO MERCADO
Defendant:
CHIPPER PARKS and GRAHAM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MERCADO v. PARKS, et al.
as 1:2018cv00195
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C. MERCADO
Defendant:
PARIS, CHIPPER PARKS, SHELBY COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MERCADO v. SHELBY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
as 1:2017cv04330
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C. MERCADO
Defendant:
SHELBY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RIDDLE et al v. BATHOLOMEW COUNTY et al
as 1:2017cv03710
Defendant:
BARTHOLOMEW COUNTY, BOOTH, OFFICER BUTLER and others
Plaintiff:
ANGELITO C. MERCADO and CHRISTOPHER RIDDLE
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.
