Cases 51 - 60 of 75
Shubert v. Doe(s), et al
as 1:2013cv06505
Plaintiff:
Ken Shubert
Defendant:
John Doe(s), Jane Doe(s) and Unknown DCFS Workers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Davis v. Watson et al
as 3:2013cv00740
Plaintiff:
Sydney Davis
Defendant:
Rick Watson, Mearl Justus, John Doe(s) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Dart et al
as 1:2013cv05090
Plaintiff:
Marvel Jackson
Defendant:
Tom Dart, Brown and John Doe(s)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fletcher et al v. Quinn et al
as 3:2013cv03191
Plaintiff:
Anthony L Fletcher, Chad Hardy, Richard Bilik and others
Defendant:
Pat Quinn, Lisa Madigan and IL General Assembly
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McFadden v. Tangman et al
as 1:2013cv01212
Plaintiff:
Onaffia McFadden
Defendant:
Gregory Tangman, . Scrogum, . Kohler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tomberg v. Rabideau et al
as 1:2013cv02228
Plaintiff:
Gregory Tomberg
Defendant:
Karen Rabideau, Sonya Gyimah, Marcus Hardy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kolak v. Rice et al
as 1:2013cv00785
Plaintiff:
Walter Kolak
Defendant:
John Rice, Samuel Lopez, C Akin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TIG Insurance Company v. Diocese of Belleville, Illinois et al
as 3:2013cv00010
Plaintiff:
TIG Insurance Company
Defendant:
Diocese of Belleville, Illinois, Raymond Kownacki, John Doe S. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Declaratory Judgement
Bibbs v. Dart et al
as 1:2012cv07418
Plaintiff:
A.J. Samuel Bibbs
Defendant:
Tom Dart, Victor Thomas, Ofc. Cerchez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stewart v. Mesrobian et al.
as 3:2012cv50273
Plaintiff:
Lavertis Stewart
Defendant:
John Doe(s) #1, #2 , #3, #4, #5, #6 and Andres Mesrobian
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.
