Cases 41 - 50 of 60
JOINER v. FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER et al
as 1:2013cv00931
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER and MARSHALL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOINER v. FRIEL et al
as 1:2013cv00923
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
JONATHAN FRIEL, ANDREW KEEVER, KIMBERLY P. HOPPIN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
JOINER v. PIEDMONT CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
as 1:2013cv00669
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
PIEDMONT CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
JOINER v. KEEVER
as 1:2013cv00636
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
ANDREW KEEVER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
JOINER v. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
as 1:2013cv00449
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Joiner v. Department of Public Safety et al
as 5:2013ct03124
Plaintiff:
Raymond Dakim Harris Joiner
Defendant:
Department of Public Safety and Officer Moore
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JOINER v. FRIEL
as 1:2013cv00448
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
JONATHAN FRIEL, FORSYTH COUNTY DETENTION CENTER and STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JOINER v. COX et al
as 1:2013cv00088
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
CHUCK COX, K. ADAMS, KINDRED and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JOINER v. FORSYTH COUNTY et al
as 1:2013cv00040
Petitioner:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Respondent:
FORSYTH COUNTY and STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
JOINER v. CUNNINGHAM et al
as 1:2012cv01381
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Defendant:
SCOTT A. CUNNINGHAM, M.D. GRIFFTH and C. JENKINS
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.
