Cases 71 - 80 of 101
Hansen v. City of Cookeville, Tennessee et al
as 2:2010cv00097
Plaintiff:
Ivor Hansen
Defendant:
City of Cookeville, Tennessee, Chase Mathis, Darrin Stout and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fulghum v. Boyce et al
as 4:2010cv00063
Plaintiff:
Randall Edwin Fulghum
Defendant:
Randall Boyce, (f/n/u) Bear, (f/n/u) Cam and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gonzalez-Calderon v. Jones et al
as 3:2010cv00814
Plaintiff:
Luis Gonzalez-Calderon
Defendant:
Truman Jones, Bob Asbury, Rutherford County Sherriff's Office-Rutherford County, Tennessee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ramos-Macario v. Jones et al
as 3:2010cv00813
Plaintiff:
Carlos Ramos-Macario
Defendant:
Truman Jones, Bob Asbury, Rutherford County Sherif's Office ruthrford County, Tennessee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Fulghum v. Boyce et al
as 1:2010cv00077
Plaintiff:
Randall Edwin Fulghum
Defendant:
Randall Boyce, (f/n/u) Bear, (f/n/u) Cam and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fulghum v. Boyce et al
as 1:2010mc00013
Plaintiff:
Randall Edwin Fulghum
Defendant:
Randall Boyce, (f/n/u) Bear, (f/n/u) Cam and others
Eady v. Young et al
as 4:2010cv00057
Plaintiff:
Ronald Eady
Defendant:
Drew Young, John Doe, 1, John Doe, 2 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Merrell v. Collier et al
as 1:2010cv00189
Plaintiff:
Wayne Merrell
Defendant:
Curtis Collier, William Carter, Scott Winnie and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Roane County, Tennessee et al
as 3:2010cv00297
Plaintiff:
Martha Davis
Defendant:
Roane County, Tennessee , Mike Farmer , Dustin Hensley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Mata-Cuellar v. Tennessee Department of Safety et al
as 3:2010cv00619
Plaintiff:
Diana Mata-Cuellar
Defendant:
Tennessee Department of Safety, David Mitchell, Michael Hogan 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.
