Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Hatter v. Wankum et al
as 2:2024cv04120
Plaintiff:
William Wayne Hatter
Defendant:
Jacob Johnson, Kelly Morriss, Rebecca Pierson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Graham v. Aiken et al.
as 3:2024cv01131
Defendant:
Charlie Summers, John Doe Tortfeasors, Marion-Hardin Corrections Commission and others
Plaintiff:
Melissa Graham
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Burnham v. Hooper et al
as 3:2024cv00335
Plaintiff:
Richard Burnham
Defendant:
Tim Hooper and Jacob Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Webster v. Anderson et al
as 2:2024cv04024
Plaintiff:
Derrick Orlando Webster
Defendant:
Jeffrey Anderson, Dywayne Hoffstetter, William Bresnaham and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Triplett v. LeBlanc
as 24-30068
Plaintiff:
Willie Triplett
Defendant:
James LeBlanc, Jacob Johnson, Randy Lavespere and others
Morgan v. LeBlanc
as 23-30851
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Edward J. Morgan
Defendant / Appellee:
James LeBlanc, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Corrections, Raman Singh, Sherwood Poret and others
Doe v. Boyce et al
as 0:2023cv00075
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Todd Boyce, Head Chaplin Todd Boyce, James David Green and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burnham v. Hooper et al
as 3:2023cv00206
Plaintiff:
Richard Burnham
Defendant:
Tim Hooper, Department of Public Correction and Safety, Jacob Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morgan v. LeBlanc
as 3:2023cv00107
Plaintiff:
Edward J. Morgan
Defendant:
James LeBlanc, Raman Singh, Sherwood Poret and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
King v. Ryder et al
as 2:2022cv04190
Plaintiff:
Christopher King
Defendant:
Phillip Ryder, Chad Hall, Jacob Johnson and others
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.
