Cases 11 - 20 of 184
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2022cv00148
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
DUDLEY v. PAULK et al
as 7:2022cv00109
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY JAMARIE DUDLEY
Defendant:
ASHLEY PAULK, CAPTAIN JASON CLIFTON, MR MATTHEW and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BOYD v. PAULK et al
as 7:2022cv00106
Plaintiff:
GARETH COY BOYD
Defendant:
Sheriff ASHLEY PAULK, JASON CLIFTON and ROBERT PICCIOTTI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CRUTCHLEY v. CLIFTON et al
as 7:2022cv00103
Plaintiff:
ADAM WADE CRUTCHLEY
Defendant:
CAPTAIN CLIFTON and SHERIFF ASHLEY PAULK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROBINSON v. PAULK et al
as 7:2022cv00102
Plaintiff:
BRIAN KEITH ROBINSON
Defendant:
SHERIFF ASHLEY PAULK, CAPTAIN JASON LEE CLIFTON and SERGEANT RICHARD SWANN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
CRUTCHLEY v. ADDISON et al
as 7:2022cv00098
Plaintiff:
ADAM WADE CRUTCHLEY
Defendant:
CAPTAIN ADDISON, SERGEANT CLARK and SHERIFF RAY PAULK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CRUTCHLEY v. PAULK et al
as 7:2022cv00095
Plaintiff:
ADAM WADE CRUTCHLEY
Defendant:
Warden ASHLEY PAULK, Officer JACKSON and Officer NESMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
POOLE v PAULK
as 7:2022cv00073
Plaintiff:
JAMES HUNTER POOLE
Defendant:
Sheriff ASHLEY PAULK
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JAMARILLO-ROCHA v GILES et al
as 7:2022cv00075
Plaintiff:
YURIDIA JAMARILLO-ROCHA
Defendant:
THOMAS P GILES, TAE JOHNSON, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Medical Malpractice
JAMARILLO-ROCHA v. MADRIGAL et al
as 5:2022cv00277
Plaintiff:
YURIDIA JAMARILLO-ROCHA
Defendant:
Francisco Madrigal, Thomas P. Giles, Tae Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice
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.
