Cases 1 - 10 of 73
Cartagena v. Semple
as 3:2024cv00583
Plaintiff:
Juan Cartagena
Defendant:
Semple
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cartagena v. Hillsborough County Sheriff Department
as 8:2023cv02854
Plaintiff:
Alfredo Cartagena
Defendant:
Hillsborough County Sheriff Department, Hillsborough County Sheriff's Department, Public Defender's Office and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Curry v. Moore et al
as 2:2023cv01614
Plaintiff:
Antoine D Curry
Defendant:
Officer Deondre Moore, Sgt Schultz, CO Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Angel Cartagena v. Allie Lovell
as 22-7279
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANGEL CARTAGENA
Defendant / Appellee:
ALLIE LOVELL, Director of all Secure Diversionary Treatment Program, T. DOWELL, Unit Manager of S.D.T.P. Unit A-1, B. KANODE, Warden of River North Correctional Center and others
Camacho-Ramos v. Albelo-Cartagena, et al
as 22-1371
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOSE L. CAMACHO-RAMOS
Respondent / Appellee:
CLOVIS ALBELO-CARTAGENA, Warden, Las Cucharas Correctional Complex and COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO
Cartagena v. Lovell et al
as 7:2021cv00539
Plaintiff:
Angel Cartagena
Defendant:
Alley Lovell, T. Dowell, B. Konode and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Britton v. Rodriguez et al
as 3:2021cv01257
Plaintiff:
Terrell Britton
Defendant:
Rodriguez, Cartagena, Pearson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brenner v. Galipeau et al
as 3:2021cv00662
Plaintiff:
Dustin Brenner
Defendant:
John Galipeau, Lewis, Morales and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
FAUCETT v. CARTAGENA et al
as 1:2021cv02309
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL W. FAUCETT
Defendant:
W. CARTAGENA, Y. FLORES and SHONDA HALL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Garcia-Cartagena v. Adan
as 3:2020cv01729
Respondent:
Angel L. Adan
Petitioner:
Hector Garcia-Cartagena
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
