Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Isho v. City of Detroit, a municipal corporation et al
as 2:2023cv12614
Plaintiff:
Tony Isho
Defendant:
City of Detroit, a municipal corporation, DETROIT POLICE DETECTIVE THOMAS HORNER, DETROIT POLICE OFFICER TERRENCE LAURENCELLE and others
Ballard v. Raymond et al
as 5:2023ct03265
Plaintiff:
Robert S. Ballard
Defendant:
Captain Raymond, Officer Molsey, Officer Sutton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Richards v. The Legal Aid Society of Manhattan et al
as 7:2023cv05926
Plaintiff:
William Richards
Defendant:
The Legal Aid Society of Manhattan, Carolyn Weeks and Vanessa Paugh
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 vc Fed. Question: Violation of Constitutional Rights
Wilkerson v. Paugh et al
as 3:2021cv00054
Defendant:
Scott Paugh, Betsy C. Jividen and Lt. Bray
Plaintiff:
Steven Ray Wilkerson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Paugh
as 5:2019cv00542
Defendant:
C.J. Paugh
Plaintiff:
Carlos Lamar Smith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Winland v. Jividen et al
as 3:2019cv00123
Defendant:
Lt. Myers, Betsy Jividen and Scott E. Paugh
Plaintiff:
Charles Lewis Winland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lyle v. City of Menlo Park et al
as 3:2019cv04215
Defendant:
Menlo Park Police Department, Chief of Police Bob Jensen, City of Menlo Park and others
Plaintiff:
John William Lyle
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Glaspell v. Paugh et al
as 3:2019cv00099
Defendant:
Jane Doe, CO Cordin, Ella Messinger and others
Plaintiff:
Daniel Lee Glaspell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Garcia v. Baldwin, et al.
as 1:2019cv00184
Defendant:
H. Lackner, F. Chavez, M Baldwin and others
Plaintiff:
Guillermo Garcia
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ricky Paugh v. Anthony Flores, et al
as 17-55262
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICKY BELMONTE PAUGH
Defendant - Appellee:
ANTHONY FLORES, R.N., in his individual capacity and L. GONZALES, c/o
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.
