Cases 51 - 60 of 481
NEAL v. AVILES et al
as 2:2022cv05574
Plaintiff:
RODNEY NEAL
Defendant:
OSCAR AVILES and NURSE WINT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BRINSON v. AVILES et al
as 2:2022cv05389
Plaintiff:
MACK N BRINSON
Defendant:
OSCAR AVILES and MICHAEL DANTICO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PETTIFORD v. AVILLES et al
as 2:2022cv05333
Plaintiff:
NAHIEM PETTIFORD
Defendant:
OSCAR AVILLES and STEVE BOARDS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ANDERSON v. AVILES et al
as 2:2022cv05269
Plaintiff:
MR. EMMANUEL T ANDERSON
Defendant:
MR. OSCAR AVILES, MR. MICHAEL DANTICO and HUDSON COUNTY FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
JONES v. AVILES et al
as 2:2022cv05123
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL FRANCIS JONES, III
Defendant:
OSCAR AVILES, MICHAEL DANTICO and HUDSON COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PERSAUD v. WELL PATH (MEDICAL SERVICES) et al
as 2:2022cv05087
Plaintiff:
RICHARD E. PERSAUD
Defendant:
WELL PATH (MEDICAL SERVICES), OSCAR AVILLES and JOHN DOES (1-10)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SYKES v. AVILES et al
as 2:2022cv05071
Plaintiff:
DASHAWN N. SYKES
Defendant:
MR. OSCAR AVILES, MEDICAL DIRECTOR and MICHEAL DANTICO
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NUNEZ v. WELL PATH (MEDICAL SERVICES) et al
as 2:2022cv05058
Plaintiff:
JOSE NUNEZ
Defendant:
WELL PATH (MEDICAL SERVICES), OSCAR AVILLES and JOHN DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DEAGUIAR v. AVILES et al
as 2:2022cv05020
Plaintiff:
HECTOR DEAGUIARE
Defendant:
OSCAR AVILES and HUDSON COUNTY JAIL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SHEFFIELD v. AVILES et al
as 2:2022cv04968
Plaintiff:
TYE SHEFFIELD
Defendant:
OSCAR AVILES and NURSE MINT
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.
