Cases 61 - 70 of 188
Piper v. ISP et al
as 4:2018cv00317
Plaintiff:
Kieth M. Piper
Defendant:
ISP, SURC Committee, Chapel Charles Marmer and others
Interested Party:
William A Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Province v. ISP et al
as 4:2018cv00318
Defendant:
ISP, SURC Committee, Chapel Charles Marmer and others
Plaintiff:
Matthew Province
Interested Party:
William A Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. ISP et al
as 4:2018cv00323
Defendant:
ISP, SURC Committee, Chapel Charles Marmer and others
Plaintiff:
Cedrick C. Thomas
Interested Party:
William A Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Worthington v. ISP et al
as 4:2018cv00320
Plaintiff:
Austin Worthington
Defendant:
ISP, SURC Committee, Chapel Charles Marmer and others
Interested Party:
William A Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2018cv02073
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2018cv04079
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Hennon v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 4:2018cv00278
Plaintiff:
Michelle Hennon
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Bragg v. Kracht et al
as 4:2018cv00264
Defendant:
John Hawk, Adam Benda, Chris Tripp and others
Plaintiff:
Darvill Jimmy Joseph Bragg
Interested Party:
William A Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McGhee v. Wachtendorf et al
as 4:2018cv00260
Defendant:
Mark McGraw, Jeremy Engeman, Lenrenzo Riles and others
Plaintiff:
Mitchell McGhee
Interested Party:
William A Hill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Collins v. Iowa Medical Classification Center et al
as 4:2018cv00256
Defendant:
Michelle Waddle, Greg Ort, Brandon Gilpin and others
Plaintiff:
Aaron J. Collins
Interested Party:
William A Hill
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.
