Cases 11 - 20 of 32
SESSION v. N.C. PAROLE COMMISSION et al
as 1:2020cv00555
Respondent:
FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, STATE OF N.C., N.C. COMBINED RECORDS and others
Petitioner:
HENDERSON SESSION, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
SIMPKINS v. N.C. PAROLE COMMISSION et al
as 1:2020cv00554
Respondent:
FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, STATE OF N.C., N.C. DEPARTMENT OF ADULT CORRECTIONS and others
Petitioner:
ANTWIONE R. SIMPKINS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Mendoza v. Forsyth County Detention Center
as 2:2019cv00046
Plaintiff:
Gustabo Guzman Mendoza
Defendant:
Forsyth County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lacy v. Forsyth County Detention Center
as 2:2018cv00021
Petitioner:
Christine Lacy
Respondent:
Forsyth County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Basir Razzak v. Ackoyt
as 16-6664
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BASIR MATEEN RAZZAK
Defendant - Appellee:
ACKOYT, Nurse Practitioner, A. P. GRIZZARD, CCS CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, MEDICAL AGENCY and others
Defendant:
DR. RHOADES
RAZZAK v. ACKOYT et al
as 1:2015cv01016
Plaintiff:
BASIR MATEEN RAZZAK
Defendant:
ACKOYT, A. GRIZZARD, RHOADES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HOUSTON v. ADAMS et al
as 1:2015cv00925
Plaintiff:
LEANDER D. HOUSTON
Defendant:
K. ADAMS, FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER OFFICERS and SLATER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
FRIEND EL v. FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER
as 1:2015cv00044
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN L. FRIEND EL
Defendant:
FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOINER v. FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER et al
as 1:2013cv00931
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER and MARSHALL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Coleman v. Hall County Detention Center et al
as 2:2013cv00170
Plaintiff:
Bruce Richard Coleman
Defendant:
Hall County Detention Center and Forsyth County Detention Center
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.
