Cases 111 - 120 of 139
ANDERSON v. Chapman et al
as 3:2012cv00088
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN JEFFERY ANDERSON
Defendant:
Joe Chapman, Wade Harris and Deborah Atkinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DANIELS v. Chapman et al
as 3:2011cv00168
Plaintiff:
JAMIE LEE DANIELS
Defendant:
Joe Chapman, GUTHRIE, RUNYAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WASHINGTON v. Fitzgerald et al
as 3:2011cv00134
Plaintiff:
DAMIEN WASHINGTON
Defendant:
Keith Fitzgerald , CHRIS KIRVEN, ZACHARY BARRETT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ANDERSON v. Chapman et al
as 3:2011cv00126
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN JEFFERY ANDERSON
Defendant:
Joe Chapman and BRADLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hendrix v. Walton County, Georgia et al
as 1:2011cv02886
Plaintiff:
Eric Miles Hendrix
Defendant:
Walton County, Georgia , Kevin W. Little , Joe Chapman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Taylor v. Thompson
as 3:2011cv00087
Plaintiff:
MELVIN TAYLOR
Defendant:
Walton County Jail, C THOMPSON and Joe Chapman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cooper v. Federal, State and Local Corpora Ficta Employees et al
as 2:2011cv00949
Defendant:
1983; Camden Easterling, Mark Astle, Steven C. Babcock and others
Plaintiff:
Love Thomas Wright Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Cooper v. Federal, State and Local Corpora Ficta Employees et al
as 2:2011ms00056
Defendant:
1983; Camden Easterling, Mark Astle, Steven C. Babcock and others
Plaintiff:
Love Thomas Wright Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Chapman v. State of Nebraska
as 4:2011cv00205
Petitioner:
Billie Joe Chapman
Respondent:
State of Nebraska
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Chapman v. Douglas County Department of Corrections et al
as 8:2011cv00145
Plaintiff:
Billie Joe Chapman
Defendant:
Jane/John Doe, John Doe, John Doe 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.
