Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Johnson v. Gagne et al
as 3:2023cv01072
Plaintiff:
Gregory Johnson
Defendant:
Gerard G. Gagne, Daniel Yesu, Michelle and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Haughey v. Dougherty et al
as 3:2023cv00958
Petitioner:
Norman Haughey
Respondent:
Daniel Dougherty and Angel Quiros
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Baltas v. Bowers et al
as 3:2023cv00764
Plaintiff:
Joe Baltas
Defendant:
Shannon Bowers, Robert Martin, Francis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Paschal-Barros v. DelPeschio et al
as 3:2022cv01275
Plaintiff:
Kyle Lamar Paschal-Barros
Defendant:
James DelPeschio, William Mulligan, Angel Quiros and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Figueroa v. Quiros et al
as 3:2022cv00586
Petitioner:
George Figueroa
Respondent:
Angel Quiros and Daniel Dougherty
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
THOMPSON v. DELRICCI et al
as 2:2018cv00126
Plaintiff:
AMEIR MONROE THOMPSON
Defendant:
RYAN DELRICCI, KELSEY PALMER, STEPHEN MAURER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timmy Lurz v. Joseph Hankins, et al
as 17-1499
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TIMMY LURZ
Defendant - Appellee:
JOSEPH HANKINS, Public Service Administrator, SHAN JUMPER, Clinical Director, SHARLENE CARAWAY, Associate Clinical Director and others
Dooley v Dougherty et al
as 4:2016cv04086
Plaintiff:
Charles Dooley
Defendant:
Daniel Dougherty, John Doe and Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lurz v. Hankins et al
as 3:2015cv03106
Plaintiff:
Timmy J Lurz
Defendant:
Joseph Hankins, Shan Jumper, Sharlene Caraway and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scott v. Ore et al
as 3:2015cv03009
Plaintiff:
Dennis Scott
Defendant:
Alice Ore, Sally Hougas and Daniel Dougherty
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
