Cases 11 - 20 of 46
MOTON v. MCKINNEY
as 1:2023cv01481
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
KYLE MCKINNEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MOTON v. PRYOR et al
as 1:2023cv00380
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
KRISTINE G. PRYOR and INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MOTON v. CARTER et al
as 1:2023cv00351
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., DENNIS REAGLE and INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MOTON v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC et al
as 1:2022cv02134
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC, ELAINE PERDUE, LISA HAMBLEN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
UNDERWOOD, MOTON, POINTER, PARKS, PIERCE v. CARTER et al
as 1:2022cv00912
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER A. UNDERWOOD, ANDRE MOTON, GERROD POINTER and others
Defendant:
ERIC J. HOLCOMB, ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., DR. DAUSS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MOTON v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC et al
as 1:2022cv00399
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
WEXFORD OF INDIANA LLC, CHRISTINE LIEDTKE and ARNOLD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MOTON v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC et al
as 1:2021cv02677
Plaintiff:
ANDRE MOTON
Defendant:
WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC, KNIESER, LIEDTKE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MOTON v. BROWN
as 2:2017cv00328
Respondent:
RICHARD BROWN
Petitioner:
ANDRE MOTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MOTON v. BROWN
as 2:2017cv00329
Respondent:
RICHARD BROWN
Petitioner:
ANDRE MOTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MOTON v. RIGGS et al
as 1:2016cv03104
Defendant:
TERRY R. CURRY and JOE RIGGS
Plaintiff:
ALASTAIR DOMINIC MOTON
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.
