Cases 21 - 30 of 147
KEMPER v. ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, LLC et al
as 1:2021cv02377
Plaintiff:
GERALD KEMP and GERALD KEMPER
Defendant:
ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, LLC, BRANDON MILLER, DEBRA HALL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv03189
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Kemp v. Segal et al
as 1:2021cv01202
Plaintiff:
Nicole Kemp
Defendant:
. Segal, . Moab, . Smith and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
KEMP v. SEVIER et al
as 1:2021cv01221
Petitioner:
KURT J. KEMP
Respondent:
SEVIER and THEODORE ROKITA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Watts et al v. Soloymi, Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv02101
Plaintiff:
Brooke Kemp and Diane Watts
Defendant:
Soloymi, Inc. and Theron T. Busby
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Gregory Kemp v. Fulton County, Illinois, et al
as 21-1079
Defendant / Appellee:
JEFF STANDARD, Sheriff of Fulton County in his Individual Capacity, FULTON COUNTY, ILLINOIS, CHRISTOPHER FORD, Sergeant in his Individual Capacity and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GREGORY KEMP
Joseph Brown, et al v. Jeffrey Kemp, et al
as 21-1042
Defendant / Appellee:
JEFFREY L. KEMP, ANGELINE E. WINTON, CHARLES SIMONO and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LOUIS WEISBERG, JOSEPH BROWN and STEPHANIE LOSSE
Kurt Kemp v. Alex Platz, et al
as 20-2948
Defendant / Appellee:
BRUCE IPPEL, Doctor, ALEX PLATZ, Doctor, PENELOPE WADLEIGH, N.P. and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KURT J. KEMP
KEMP v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
as 1:2020cv00955
Petitioner:
MICHAEL A. KEMP
Respondent:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA and MARK SEVIER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WHITE-BEY v. HOLCOMB et al
as 2:2020cv00147
Plaintiff:
DONYALL E. WHITE-BEY
Defendant:
FREDRICK A. MEDLEY, JAMES W. SHAFFER, CHARLES F. MILLER 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.
