Cases 1 - 10 of 291
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-5115
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cooper v. Wilson et al
as 1:2024cv00413
Plaintiff:
Tiayoakashima Cooper
Defendant:
Conner B. Wilson, Judge Colm F. Connolly, Kali Sudler and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Wilson v. McDonough
as 24-1568
Claimant:
ALEXANDER B. WILSON, JR.
Respondent:
DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Wilson v. Lee County Detention Center (INMATE 3)
as 3:2024cv00086
Plaintiff:
Vandy B. Wilson
Defendant:
Lee County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ritter v. Lee County Detention Center (INMATE 1)
as 3:2024cv00067
Plaintiff:
Brian Henry Ritter, Raymond Mitchell Keeton, Courtney Morgan and others
Defendant:
Lee County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilson v. South Carolina, State of et al
as 5:2024cv00438
Plaintiff:
Alexander B Wilson, Jr and Alexander Bernard Wilson, Jr.
Defendant:
South Carolina, State of, South Carolina Dept of Mental Health and South Carolina Dept of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Dida v. Hvarre
as 3:2024cv00132
Plaintiff:
Mohamed Dida
Defendant:
Kimberly Hvarre, Dr. Larson, Jane Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
NEVIL v. WILSON et al
as 3:2024cv00004
Plaintiff:
DUSTIN M. NEVIL
Defendant:
LAURRE B. WILSON, BRENT M. MACER and JILLIAN N. KRATOCHVIL
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2520 Civil Damages for Interception of Wire or Oral Communications
Wilson v. McDonough
as 24-1008
Claimant:
ALEXANDER B. WILSON, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Wilson v. Synovus Bank
as 3:2023cv03991
Plaintiff:
Alexander B Wilson, Jr and Alexander Bernard Wilson, Jr.
Defendant:
Synovus Bank
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
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.
