Cases 51 - 60 of 79
Wattleton v. Kelly et al
as 4:2010cv40199
Plaintiff:
David Earl Wattleton
Defendant:
Kelly and Fort Devens Federal Medical Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Phelps v. United States of America et al
as 1:2010cv11591
Plaintiff:
Coy Phelps
Defendant:
United States of America, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Luis Martinez and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Hickey v. Devens CPL, Inc.
as 1:2010cv10834
Plaintiff:
Charles Hickey
Defendant:
Devens CPL, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Hickey v. Devens CPL, Inc.
as 4:2010cv10834
Plaintiff:
Charles Hickey
Defendant:
Devens CPL, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Burgess v. Grondolsky et al
as 4:2010cv40028
Plaintiff:
Jefferson Burgess
Defendant:
J Grondolsky, FMC, Devens and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Wattleton v. Amica et al
as 4:2010cv40025
Plaintiff:
David Earl Wattleton
Defendant:
Amica, Federal Medical Center at Devens and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Phelps v. Local 0222 et al
as 1:2009cv11218
Plaintiff:
Coy Phelps
Defendant:
Local 0222, American Federation of Government Employees AFL-C10, ATS Corporation (Trulinks/Trufone) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
Badash v. FMC Devens et al
as 4:2008cv40067
Plaintiff:
Josef Badash
Defendant:
FMC Devens and Carolyn Sabol
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Garner v. FMC Devens Medical Center
as 4:2007cv40322
Plaintiff:
David Lee Garner
Defendant:
FMC Devens Medical Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bowie v. Warden, FMC Devens et al
as 4:2007cv11957
Petitioner:
Willard D. Bowie, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden, FMC Devens, Federal Bureau of Prisons and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
