Cases 41 - 50 of 106
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv00079
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stewart v. Utah Department of Corrections
as 2:2018cv00174
Plaintiff:
Calvin Paul Stewart
Defendant:
Utah Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Medina v. Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2018cv00148
Plaintiff:
Hilario Medina
Defendant:
Department of Corrections, Rollin Cook and Prisoner Litigation Unit
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rippey v. Utah Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2018cv00151
Plaintiff:
Stephen Rippey
Defendant:
Utah Department of Corrections, Alfred Bigelow, Devon Blood and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Messineo v. Kemp et al
as 2:2017cv01225
Plaintiff:
Richard Messineo
Defendant:
Debbie Kemp, Utah Board of Pardons and Parole, Utah Department of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ortiz v. Torgenson et al
as 2:2017cv00328
Plaintiff:
Daniel Ortiz
Defendant:
Sarah Torgenson, FNU Cultur, Roger Peterson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lee v. Utah Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2017cv00301
Plaintiff:
Arthur Randall Lee
Defendant:
Utah Department of Corrections, Joseph Coombs, Chad Duford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Crane v. Utah Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2016cv01103
Plaintiff:
Janet Crane
Defendant:
Utah Department of Corrections , Alfred Bigelow , Richard Garden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Vigil v. Crowther et al
as 1:2016cv00132
Plaintiff:
Chelsie Vigil
Defendant:
Scott Crowther and State of Utah Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Massey et al v. Utah Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2016cv00956
Plaintiff:
Robert J. Massey and Jacqulyn Massey
Defendant:
Utah Department of Corrections, Rollin Cook, Daniel B. Harman and others
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.