Cases 21 - 30 of 38
May v. Pimpong et al
as 5:2010ct03129
Plaintiff:
James Anthony May
Defendant:
Hattie B. Pimpong, State of North Carolina and DOC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Dillehay v. McKoy et al
as 5:2010ct03090
Plaintiff:
Calvin L. Dillehay
Defendant:
Toni McKoy, Officer Hailey, L. Locklear and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
May v. The State of North Carolina et al
as 5:2010ct03078
Plaintiff:
James Anthony May
Defendant:
The State of North Carolina, DOC, Alvin W. Keller and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Watkins v. Bennett et al
as 5:2009ct03127
Plaintiff:
Adrian Dominic Watkins
Defendant:
Boyd Bennett, Betty Brown, Becky Pope and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
May v. Horton et al
as 5:2009ct03081
Plaintiff:
James Anthony May
Defendant:
Melvin A. Horton, Boyd Bennett, Hattie B. Pimpong and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Edward Moses v. M. Blocher
as 09-6132
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD LEE MOSES
Defendant - Appellee:
M. BLOCHER, MICHAEL HARDEE, HUGH MARTIN, JR. and others
Streater v. Haines et al
as 3:2008cv00518
Plaintiff:
Ervin L. Streater
Defendant:
Margaret Haines, William Waldron, James Rowell and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
ALSTON v. BENNETT et al
as 1:2008cv00437
Plaintiff:
KENNETH EUGENE ALSTON
Defendant:
BOYD BENNETT, MARSHALL, HATTIE B. PIMPONG and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Stuart Tompkins v. Department of Corrections
as 08-6875
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STUART WAYNE TOMPKINS
Defendant - Appellee:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, T. R. CARROLL, CHRIS BATTEN and others
Tacarlos Miller v. Don Wood
as 08-6497
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TACARLOS ANTIGO MILLER
Defendant - Appellee:
DON G. WOOD, ADMINISTRATOR #1 SCOTLAND CORRECTIONAL, DIRECTOR OF PRISONS BOYD BENNETT, THEODIS BECK, SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and others
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.
