Cases 41 - 50 of 111
Rolfes v. Doe et al
as 1:2015cv05675
Plaintiff:
Christopher S. Rolfes
Defendant:
John Doe, Cook County Dept. of Corrections, Reyes and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Furlano v. Dart et al
as 1:2015cv05376
Plaintiff:
Michael Furlano
Defendant:
Thomas J. Dart, Cook County Dept. of Corrections and Cook County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tarrats v. Cook County Dept Of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv05375
Plaintiff:
Julio Tarrats
Defendant:
Cook County Dept Of Corrections and Thomas J. Dart
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stiemann v. Cook County Dept. of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv04316
Plaintiff:
Ted J. Stiemann
Defendant:
Cook County Dept. of Corrections, Tom Dart and Cook County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stratton v. Cook County Dept. of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv03853
Plaintiff:
Thurman Stratton
Defendant:
Cook County Dept. of Corrections and Thomas J. Dart
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McKay v. Cook County Dept. of Corrections
as 1:2015cv03023
Plaintiff:
Marcus McKay
Defendant:
Cook County Dept. of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mcgee v. Cook County Dept. of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv02885
Plaintiff:
Kelvin Mcgee
Defendant:
Cook County Dept. of Corrections and Cermak Health Clinic
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Moore v. Dart et al
as 1:2015cv02336
Plaintiff:
Mario A. Moore
Defendant:
Tom Dart, Cook County Dept. of Corrections, Cook County Jail and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rudolph v. Cook County Dept. of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv02014
Plaintiff:
Everett Rudolph
Defendant:
Cook County Dept. of Corrections and Thomas J. Dart
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Charles v. Cook County Dept. of Corrections et al
as 1:2015cv01465
Plaintiff:
Jamaal Charles
Defendant:
Cook County Dept. of Corrections, Thomas Dart and Suptintendent of Div. 9
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.
