Cases 31 - 40 of 171
BAILEY v. GARDNER et al
as 1:2016cv00286
Plaintiff:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant:
JOSEPH GARDNER, C. C. BLAKE, K. D. MACKEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BAILEY v. GARDNER et al
as 1:2016cv00284
Plaintiff:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant:
JOSEPH GARDNER, WILLIAM C. TOMAN, JR., K. D. MACKEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BAILEY v. GARDNER et al
as 1:2016cv00280
Plaintiff:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant:
JOSEPH GARDNER, POLICE DEPARTMENT, FAYETTEVILLE, N.C., UNKNOWN POLICE OFFICER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BAILEY v. GARDNER et al
as 1:2016cv00281
Plaintiff:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant:
JOSEPH GARDNER, CARL BRITT, JR., BRUTSCH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robert Bailey v. City of Fayetteville, NC
as 16-6377
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, WILLIAM C. TOMAN, JR., R. M. ASHLEY and others
Robert Bailey v. City of Fayetteville, NC
as 14-7255
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, WILLIAM C. TOMAN, JR., R. M. ASHLEY and others
Robert Bailey v. City of Fayetteville, NC
as 14-7253
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, WILLIAM C. TOMAN, JR., R. M. ASHLEY and others
Robert Bailey v. City of Fayetteville, NC
as 14-7257
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, WILLIAM C. TOMAN, JR., R. M. ASHLEY and others
Robert Bailey v. City of Fayetteville
as 14-7180
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, WILLIAM C. TOMAN, JR., R. M. ASHLEY and others
Robert Bailey v. William Toman, Jr.
as 14-6302
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROBERT GENE BAILEY
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM C. TOMAN, JR., R. M. ASHLEY, K. D. MACKEY 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.
