Cases 1 - 10 of 45
Dingle v. Smith et al
as 1:2024cv00236
Plaintiff:
Marthur L Dingle
Defendant:
Phillip C Smith, Jr, Raquel West and Zena Stephens
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Luginbyhl v. Moore, et al
as 24-6102
Plaintiff:
LEVI LUGINBYHL
Defendant:
DARRELL L. MOORE, JUDGE PHILLIP C. CORLEY, CIMARRON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, AKA Core Civic and others
Reeves v. Brian Stirling/SCDC
as 0:2024cv00528
Petitioner:
Phillip C Reeves
Respondent:
Brian Stirling/SCDC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lewis (ID 98308) v. Zmuda et al
as 5:2023cv03236
Plaintiff:
Tony Tremayne Lewis
Defendant:
Jeff Zmuda, David C. Ferris, Darcie Holthaus and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Luginbyhl v. Moore et al
as 5:2023cv00939
Defendant:
Cimarron Correctional Facility, Darrell L Moore, Judge Phillip C Corley and others
Plaintiff:
Levi Luginbyhl
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Reeves v. Warden / Director
as 0:2023cv00727
Plaintiff:
Phillip C Reeves
Defendant:
Warden / Director
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Reeves v. South Carolina, State of
as 0:2022cv04616
Petitioner:
Phillip C Reeves and Phillip Charles Reeves
Respondent:
South Carolina, State of and Director, Greenville County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (County)
Reeves v. Roberts
as 6:2022cv04410
Plaintiff:
Phillip C. Reeves, Beneficiary and Natural Person
Defendant:
April Roberts
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Reeves v. Holden et al
as 6:2022cv04145
Plaintiff:
Phillip C. Reeves, Beneficiary and Natural Person
Defendant:
Gregory Maxwell Holden, John Haen, Christopher D. Robinson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Beets v. Anderson County, Tennessee et al
as 3:2020cv00170
Plaintiff:
Phillip C. Beets
Defendant:
Southern Health Partners and Anderson County, Tennessee
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.
