Cases 31 - 40 of 46
Malloy v. Baumgardner et al
as 1:2016cv00132
Plaintiff:
Kelly Malloy
Defendant:
Jeffrey Baumgardner, Keith Day, Steven Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pusha v. Payne et al
as 1:2016cv00134
Plaintiff:
Mychel Pusha
Defendant:
Karen Payne, Steven Williams, Dexter L Payne and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Elmore v. Peter et al
as 1:2016cv00119
Plaintiff:
Jeffery C Elmore
Defendant:
Justin Peter, H Boles, Steven Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rhodes v. Tolar et al
as 1:2016cv00131
Plaintiff:
Johnny Rhodes
Defendant:
Ruby Tolar, Keith Day, Justine Minor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Burke v. Gatewood et al
as 1:2016cv00113
Plaintiff:
Stanley Burke
Defendant:
Gatewood, Wendy Kelley, Downey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Day et al v. B N S F Railway Co et al
as 6:2016cv01248
Plaintiff:
George Keith Day , Jody Day , Dustin Daigle and others
Defendant:
B N S F Railway Co , Tyrone Clark , Brian Stanga and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1349
Abdulaziz/Askew v. Kelly et al
as 1:2016cv00042
Plaintiff:
Mu'min Abdulaziz/Askew
Defendant:
Wendy Kelly, Dexter Payne, Benny Magness and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Herrington et al v. Babcock Law Firm L L C et al
as 3:2014mc00031
Respondent:
Mr. Timothy Stephen Babcock, Babcock Law Firm, LLC, Babcock Partners L L C and others
Movant:
Charles Dawson and Leo Herrington, Jr.
Interested Party:
Mr. Keith Day, Forever Green Athletic Fields, Inc. and David Ripka
Fredrick Mason v. Wendy Kelly, et al
as 13-3001
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Fredrick Mason
Defendant - Appellee:
Wendy Kelly, Deputy Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, Marie Austin, Infirmary Administrator, Cummins Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction, Iona Wade, Former Nurse, Cummins Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction 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.
