Cases 41 - 50 of 252
Daywitt et al v. Minnesota Department of Human Services et al
as 0:2022cv00007
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Daywitt, Justin Newman, Andrew Day and others
Defendant:
Minnesota Department of Human Services and Richard McHugh
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Prouty v. Harpstead et al
as 0:2022cv00155
Plaintiff:
Darrell Dean Prouty
Defendant:
Jodi Harpstead, Nancy Johnson, DHS-MSOP and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Prouty v. Miles et al
as 0:2021cv02606
Plaintiff:
Darrell D. Prouty
Defendant:
David N. Miles, Matt Dahl, Derek J. Koecher and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ward v. Minnesota Department of Human Services et al
as 0:2021cv02504
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Franklin Ward
Defendant:
Minnesota Department of Human Services and Minnesota Security Hospital
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prouty v. Kosloski et al
as 0:2021cv02431
Plaintiff:
Darrell D. Prouty
Defendant:
Andrea Marlee Kosloski, Sara Kulas and Dana Osbourne
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prouty v. Miles et al
as 0:2021cv02179
Plaintiff:
Darrell Dean Prouty
Defendant:
David Miles, Jeremy Wouri, Sue Swansen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prouty v. Johnson et al
as 0:2021cv02438
Plaintiff:
Darrell Dean Prouty
Defendant:
Nancy Johnson, Jodi Harpstead, Steve Sajdak and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prouty v. State of Minnesota et al
as 0:2021cv02437
Plaintiff:
Darrell Dean Prouty
Defendant:
State of Minnesota, All current DHS-MSOP employees, Jodi Harpstead and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prouty v. DHS-MSOP employees et al.
as 0:2021cv02207
Plaintiff:
Darrell Dean Prouty
Defendant:
DHS-MSOP employees, Nicole Kielty, Jessica Joyal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
O'Donnell v. United States Navy et al
as 0:2021cv02184
Plaintiff:
Mikey J. O'Donnell
Defendant:
United States Navy and Carlton County District Court
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.
