Cases 21 - 30 of 41
Winn v. Reinke et al
as 4:2012cv00268
Plaintiff:
Kathi Lyn Winn
Defendant:
Brent Reinke, Woolf, Lee Ann Hamilton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jonas v. Reinke et al
as 4:2012cv00251
Plaintiff:
Sandy Jonas
Defendant:
Brent Reinke, Jim Woolf, LeeAnne Hamilton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas Baccus, Jr. v. Board of Corrections, et al
as 12-35394
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS BACCUS, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
BOARD OF CORRECTIONS, ROBIN SANDY, CAROLING MELINIE and others
Nathan Diggs v. Board of Corrections, et al
as 11-36076
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NATHAN DANIEL DIGGS
Defendant - Appellee:
BOARD OF CORRECTIONS, ROBIN SANDY, CAROLING MELINIE and others
Blanc v. Pocatello Women's Correctional Center et al
as 4:2011cv00550
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Blanc
Defendant:
Pocatello Women's Correctional Center, Brent Reinke, Jim Woolf and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stephen Cherry v. Dewayne Shedd, et al
as 11-35795
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STEPHEN A. CHERRY
Defendant - Appellee:
DEWAYNE SHEDD, JEFF KIRKMAN, RANDY HIGGINS and others
Michael Hayes v. CCA, et al
as 11-35763
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL T. HAYES
Defendant - Appellee:
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA, a Maryland corporation, JOHN FERGUSON, CEO, CCA, IDAHO CORRECTIONAL CENTER and others
Blanc et al v. Reinke et al
as 4:2011cv00333
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Blanc, Sandy Jonas, Kathryn Vann and others
Defendant:
Brent Reinke, Jim Woolf, LeeAnne Hamilton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Baccus v. Board of Corrections et al
as 1:2011cv00351
Plaintiff:
Thomas Baccus, Jr
Defendant:
Board of Corrections, Robin Sandy, Caroling Melinie and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Newman v. Board of Corrections et al
as 1:2011cv00354
Plaintiff:
James Earl Newman
Defendant:
Brent Reinke, Pam Sonnen, Joanna Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
