Cases 11 - 20 of 45
Gerlach v. Wasko et al
as 4:2022cv04134
Plaintiff:
Jeremiah Luke Gerlach
Defendant:
Kellie Wasko, Dan Sullivan, Joan Adam and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carter v. South Dakota Dept. of Corrections et al
as 4:2022cv04103
Plaintiff:
Matthew Carter
Defendant:
South Dakota Dept. of Corrections, Kellie Wasko, Dan Sullivan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Kryger v. Sullivan et al
as 4:2022cv04086
Petitioner:
Christopher Dean Kryger
Respondent:
Warden Dan Sullivan and The Attorney General of the State of South Dakota
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Shaw v. Wasko et al
as 4:2022cv04054
Plaintiff:
James Elmer Shaw
Defendant:
Kelly Wasko, Dan Sullivan, Brent Fluke and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv03007
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Tieszen v. Bastian et al
as 5:2021cv05034
Defendant:
Dan Friedel, Judge John Bastian, Fred Baxter and others
Plaintiff:
Randy L. Tieszen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Weeks v. City of Lake Norden et al
as 1:2020cv01029
Defendant:
Jimmy Murphy, City of Lake Norden, Todd Boyd and others
Plaintiff:
Nikolas Weeks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Matute Cabanag v. Tripp et al
as 4:2020cv04110
Defendant:
Dan Nelson, Chris Nipe, David Fink and others
Plaintiff:
Jenalyn Matute Cabanag
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2019cv04109
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LaFleur v. Krebs et al
as 4:2018cv04125
Defendant:
Lora Hubbel, Shantel Krebs, Joel Bergan and others
Plaintiff:
Dr. Terry Lee LaFleur
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.
