Cases 31 - 40 of 123
TAYLOR v. ARAMARK FOOD SERVICE et al
as 1:2019cv02761
Plaintiff:
GREGORY A. TAYLOR
Defendant:
ELLIS and ARAMARK FOOD SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis v. Aramark Food Service et al
as 2:2019cv00081
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Anthony Davis
Defendant:
Food Service Director and Aramark Food Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MOORE v. MILLER et al
as 1:2018cv02603
Plaintiff:
GARGANUS TEQUILLA MOORE
Defendant:
HAYS, ARAMARK FOOD SERVICES COMPANY and BRANDON MILLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gillum v. House of Corrections Programs Administration et al
as 2:2018cv00735
Plaintiff:
Michael L Gillum
Defendant:
House of Corrections Programs Administration , LT Hopkins, Jose Hernandez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nelson v. Aramark Food Service et al
as 1:2018cv00614
Plaintiff:
Earl Nelson
Defendant:
Aramark Food Service and Ryan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RICHARDS v. CORIZON HEALTH et al
as 2:2018cv00165
Defendant:
ARAMARK FOOD SERVICE, RICHARD BROWN, CHAVEZ and others
Plaintiff:
DANNY R. RICHARDS
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Curlee v. Callahan et al
as 2:2018cv00021
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Curlee
Defendant:
Rachell E Callahan, John Matz, Todd Christopherson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Griffin v. City of Milwaukee et al
as 1:2017cv01729
Plaintiff:
Tisdale DeMario Griffin
Defendant:
City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee Sheriff Dept , Milwaukee County Jail Facility and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Gillum v. Aramark Food Service et al
as 2:2017cv01266
Plaintiff:
Michael L Gillum
Defendant:
Aramark Food Service and Armor Correctional Health Services Inc
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Miller v. Armark LLC et al
as 2:2017cv01153
Plaintiff:
Mickey Miller
Defendant:
Armark LLC, Aramark Food Service, Supervisor Lenord 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.
