Cases 61 - 70 of 423
BAYSE v. WARD et al
as 5:2022cv00086
Plaintiff:
ROBBIN AMANDA BAYSE and ROBERT BAYSE
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER TIMOTHY WARD, MEDICAL DIRECTOR SHARON LEWIS, DIRECTOR JAVEL JACKSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ROBINSON v. DOES
as 3:2022cv00021
Plaintiff:
PAUL LEWIS ROBINSON
Defendant:
JOHN AND OR JANE DOES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RODGERS v. HAMMACK-EVANS et al
as 4:2022cv00033
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN RODGERS
Defendant:
DEPUTY WARDEN HAMMACK-EVANS, JOHN AND OR JANE DOES, Warden Kevin Sprayberry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RODGERS v. HAMMACK-EVANS et al
as 1:2022cv00004
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN RODGERS
Defendant:
DEPUTY WARDEN HAMMACK-EVANS and JOHN AND OR JANE DOES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PITTS v. DOE
as 1:2022cv00002
Plaintiff:
BOBBY PITTS
Defendant:
JOHN AND OR JANE DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SPIVEY v. WARDEN et al
as 5:2021cv00398
Plaintiff:
MANDRIEZ SPIVEY
Defendant:
UNKNOWN WARDEN, ASSISTANT WARDEN A W UNKNOWN, PSYCHOLOGICAL TEAM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SEIGLER v. BAISDEN et al
as 1:2021cv00202
Plaintiff:
DEXTER SEIGLER
Defendant:
CPL JAMAL BAISDEN, JOHN AND OR JANE DOE and JOHN AND OR JANE DOES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BROWN et al v. COLUMBUS POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 4:2021cv00162
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL B BROWN and CLARA VIRGINIA BRITTON
Defendant:
COLUMBUS POLICE DEPARTMENT, Officer ROBERT HOOKS, Officer KERTAVIOUS COPPINS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
COOPER v. WARD et al
as 5:2021cv00272
Plaintiff:
CLIFFORD COOPER
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER TIMOTHY WARD, WARDEN TREVONZA BOBBITT and JOHN AND OR JANE DOES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HARGREAVES v. WARD et al
as 5:2021cv00257
Plaintiff:
CHAD HARGREAVES
Defendant:
GDC COMMISSONER TIMOTHY WARD, GOVERNOR BRIAN KEMP, JOHN OR JANE DOE 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.
