Cases 1 - 10 of 1,725
Jesus Jehovah v. Harold Clarke
as 24-6428
Plaintiff:
JESUS EMMANUEL JEHOVAH, a/k/a Robert Gabriel Love, a/k/a Gabriel Alexander Antonio
Defendant:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, A. DAVID ROBINSON, Deputy Director, COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA and others
Pearson v. Washington
as 2:2024cv11179
Petitioner:
Andre DeShawn Pearson
Respondent:
Michigan, People of the State of and Raphael Washington
Reo Covington v. William Chronister, et al
as 24-1906
Plaintiff:
Reo L. Covington
Defendant:
William Chronister, Dardenelle Police Officer, Does, 1-4, Dardenelle Police Officers, Pearson's Towing & Recovery Services LLC, Towing Services and others
Pearson v. Orange County Jail et al
as 1:2024cv03354
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Richard v. Smith et al
as 3:2024cv00089
Plaintiff:
CARL RICHARD
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT BARRY SMITH, WELLPATH MEDICAL CO., DR. MUHAMMAD NAJI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Havens v. Pearson et al
as 2:2024cv00096
Plaintiff:
Christopher Dale Havens
Defendant:
Heather Pearson, Vanmetter, Stevenson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Havens v. Chapa et al
as 2:2024cv00105
Plaintiff:
Christopher Dale Havens
Defendant:
Amando Chapa, Corporal Fincher, Appel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2024cv00054
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Richard v. Smith et al
as 4:2024cv00624
Plaintiff:
Carl Richard
Defendant:
Superintendent Barry Smith, Wellpath Medical Co., Dr. Muhammad Naji and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pearson v. Advent Health et al
as 8:2024cv00781
Plaintiff:
Vernon Jewel Pearson, III
Defendant:
Advent Health and Gracepoint Mental Health
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.
