Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Gravlee v. Tibbs et al
as 5:2024cv00221
Plaintiff:
John Christian Gravlee
Defendant:
FNU Tibbs, FNU Prince, FNU Kala and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Mineau v. King et al
as 1:2021cv00310
Plaintiff:
Terrance Mineau
Defendant:
Oneida Behavioral Health Center and Mary Beth King
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Maloney et al
as 1:2017cv01475
Plaintiff:
Adam C Smith
Defendant:
Corey Maloney, Kurt Bode, Robert C Bollinger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Steven Corbin v. US Department of Veterans Affa, et al
as 16-14978
Petitioner - Appellant:
STEVEN T. CORBIN
Respondent - Appellee:
US DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS and UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC., d.b.a. Hill Crest Behavioral Health Center
Dansby v. Maricopa County Sheriff's Office et al
as 1:2014cv04174
Plaintiff:
Trent Derrell Dansby
Defendant:
Desert Uista Behavioral Health Center, Maricopa County Attorney Office, Maricopa County Sheriff's Office and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dennis Obado v. UMDNJ, et al
as 12-2640
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DENNIS OBADO
Defendant - Appellee:
UMDNJ, Behavioral Health Center, ANTHONY THOMAS, ANTHONY TOBIAS and others
Gabe Culler v. Bibb County Superior Court, et al
as 12-12057
Petitioner - Appellant:
GABE LOCKETT CULLER
Respondent - Appellee:
BIBB COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, RIVER EDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF GEORGIA
CULLER v. BIBB COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT et al
as 5:2012cv00058
Plaintiff:
GABE LOCKETT CULLER
Defendant:
BIBB COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, RIVER EDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER and GEORGIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Roberts v. New Mexico Behavioral Health Center State Hospital
as 1:2007cv00678
Plaintiff:
Saratoga Roberts
Defendant:
New Mexico Behavioral Health Center State Hospital
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.
