Cases 11 - 20 of 32
ESTATE OF TAVARIS McGUIRE v. BAKER et al
as 1:2019cv00876
Defendant:
GREG GOODNIGHT, ROBERT BAKER, HOWARD COUNTY INDIANA and others
Plaintiff:
ESTATE OF TAVARIS McGUIRE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ABNEY v. ROGERS et al
as 1:2019cv00271
Defendant:
ROBIN BUYERS, STEVE ROGERS, BILL MENGES and others
Plaintiff:
KEITH D. ABNEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2018cv01122
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Bingham v. KJAMS, LLC et al
as 3:2018cv00765
Defendant:
Ford Motor Co., KJAMS, LLC dba Steve Rogers Ford, Ford Motor Company and others
Plaintiff:
Donna Bingham
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
SMITH v. ROGER et al
as 1:2018cv00302
Defendant:
ROBIN BYERS, HOWARD CO. SHERIFF DEPT. and STEVE ROGER
Plaintiff:
EDD SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JESSIE-BEY v. GEO et al
as 1:2017cv04578
Respondent:
JACK ADAMS, JAMES ANDREWS, JERRY BALENTINE and others
Petitioner:
GREGORY JOEL JESSIE-BEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
TURNER v. ROGERS
as 1:2017cv02246
Defendant:
STEVE ROGERS
Plaintiff:
MARTY COLE TURNER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SHOOK v. ROGERS
as 1:2017cv00907
Defendant:
STEVE ROGERS
Plaintiff:
JOHN SHOOK
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
DILL v. SHERIFF OF HOWARD COUNTY et al
as 1:2016cv03152
Plaintiff:
ROBERT ALLEN DILL
Defendant:
HOWARD COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER, STEVE ROGERS and SHERIFF OF HOWARD COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
EPPERLY v. HOWARD COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER et al
as 1:2016cv03005
Defendant:
JEFFREY BRACKETT, JUSTIN CHRISTMAS, HOWARD COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER and others
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM EPPERLY
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.
