Cases 11 - 20 of 231
MIDDLETON v. EMERSON et al
as 1:2024cv00341
Plaintiff:
JASON MICHAEL MIDDLETON
Defendant:
EMERSON, AUSTIN, HARTZEL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00030
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
NEATHERY v. REAGLE et al
as 1:2024cv00292
Plaintiff:
AUSTIN NOAH NEATHERY
Defendant:
CHRISTINA REAGLE, DENNIS REAGLE, ANDREW COLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NEATHERY v. REAGLE et al
as 1:2024cv00246
Plaintiff:
AUSTIN NOAH NEATHERY
Defendant:
CHRISTINA REAGLE, DENNIS REAGLE, ANDREW COLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JAMES v. HARMAN et al
as 1:2024cv00156
Plaintiff:
TYWAN JAMES
Defendant:
AUSTIN HARMAN, AMANDA TERRY, KOSHNER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Porter v. Murphy et al
as 2:2024cv00005
Plaintiff:
Reginald Darnell Porter
Defendant:
Kevin Murphy, Mary A. DeBoer, Gary S Germann and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
AUSTIN v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv00024
Plaintiff:
EZRA SHERMAN HENRY AUSTIN
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00004
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
WOODY et al v. REAGLE et al
as 1:2023cv02315
Plaintiff:
BRANDON WOODY, ANTHONY WHITE, MARCO WEBSTER and others
Defendant:
DENNIS REAGLE, MAGGIE BRYANT, CENTURION HEALTH OF INDIANA, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ECKES v. PRETORIUS
as 2:2023cv00583
Petitioner:
AUSTIN ECKES
Respondent:
PRETORIUS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
