Cases 21 - 30 of 41
Page v. Commandant
as 5:2019cv03020
Respondent:
Commandant
Petitioner:
Jeffery T. Page
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Smith v. Pitt County Municipality et al
as 5:2016ct03064
Plaintiff:
Michael Maurice Smith
Defendant:
Pitt County Municipality, Greenville Police Department, K.L. Knox and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Mazick et al
as 3:2015cv00548
Plaintiff:
Leonard Thomas
Defendant:
Brad S Mazick, Barbara Eichman MD, Nicholas P Wardell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv01560
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv01540
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Page v. Adams County Detention et al
as 1:2015cv01376
Plaintiff:
Sharrieckia T. Page
Defendant:
Adams County Detention Facility, Williams, Dependency and Neglect Human Social Services and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
THOMAS v. LEMMON et al
as 1:2015cv00849
Defendant:
DWYANE ALSIP, JEFF D. BALLENGER, DOUGLAS BARNES and others
Plaintiff:
LEONARD THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ivan Page v. Erica McDowell, et al
as 13-2259
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Ivan T. Page
Defendant - Appellee:
Erica McDowell, Therapist, Missouri Department of Corrections, In Her Official an Individual Capacity, Julie Motley, Director, MOSOP, In Her Official and Individual Capacity, Mariann Atwell, Director, Rehabilitative Services, In Her Official and Indvidual Capacity and others
Charlie Mabe v. T Page et al
as 2:2013cv02097
Defendant:
Does, T Page and G Rojas
Plaintiff:
Charlie Mabe
CEPHAS v. GREEN et al
as 2:2012cv05647
Plaintiff:
DARREN L. CEPHAS
Defendant:
FRANK GREEN, B. CONLEY and T. PAGE
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.
