Cases 11 - 20 of 178
Rush v. Helfrich et al
as 1:2024cv02971
Plaintiff:
Dennis Rush
Defendant:
Bryan Helfrich, Brandon Walls, David Haag and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Charles Robinson v. Latoya Hughes, et al
as 24-1519
Plaintiff:
CHARLES MOHAMED ROBINSON, also known as Charles D. Robinson
Defendant:
LATOYA HUGHES, DISTRICT ONE PAROLE RE-ENTRY GROUP DEPUTY CHIEF, DISTRICT ONE PAROLE RE-ENTRY GROUP SUPERVISOR and others
Brown, Jr. v. Tack et al
as 3:2024cv50110
Plaintiff:
Allen Brown, Jr. and Blue
Defendant:
Andrea Tack, Wende, Billings and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Hughes et al
as 3:2024cv50061
Plaintiff:
Travionte Williams
Defendant:
Latoya Hughes, Dr. J. Chess, Dr. M. Young and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Boykins v. Dortch et al
as 3:2024cv50056
Plaintiff:
Byron Boykins
Defendant:
Christine Brannon Dortch, Andrea Tack, Mr. Manzano and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Abrams v. Chess et al
as 3:2024cv50007
Plaintiff:
Edward Abrams
Defendant:
Jamie Chess, Jennifer Hoffman, Ramon Marquez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pagsisihan v. Wexford Health Sources et al
as 3:2024cv50008
Plaintiff:
Andrei Pagsisihan
Defendant:
Wexford Health Sources, Dr. Sy, Andrea Tack and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Eason v. Raoul et al
as 3:2023cv50462
Defendant:
AFSCME, Kwame Raoul, J. B. Pritzker and others
Plaintiff:
Hannibal Eason
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Watson v. Illinois Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2024cv50001
Defendant:
Global Tel Link Corporation, Illinois Department of Corrections, Latoya Hughes and others
Plaintiff:
Nolan Watson
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.
