Cases 11 - 20 of 23
Wilkerson v. Paugh et al
as 3:2021cv00054
Defendant:
Scott Paugh, Betsy C. Jividen and Lt. Bray
Plaintiff:
Steven Ray Wilkerson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Betsy Jividen v. John Baxley, Jr.
as 21-102
Respondent:
JOHN BAXLEY, JR., DANNY SPIKER, JR., JOSHUA HALL and others
Petitioner:
WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION and BETSY C. JIVIDEN, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the West Virginia Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation
White v. Jividen
as 1:2020cv00269
Defendant:
Betsy C. Jividen
Plaintiff:
Jayson Bradley White
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Jeremy Salisbury and Jamie Hicks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ables v. WVDOCR et al
as 5:2020cv00245
Defendant:
WVDOCR and Betsy C. Jividen
Plaintiff:
David Glen Ables
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rauch v. WVDCR et al
as 2:2020cv00502
Defendant:
Donald F. Ames, WVDCR, Cpl. Deven Lilly and others
Plaintiff:
Jordan L. Rauch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rauch v. Keefe Commissary Network et al
as 2:2020cv00501
Plaintiff:
Jordan L. Rauch
Defendant:
John Frame, Betsy C. Jividen, Keefe Commissary Network and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Greene v. WVDOC
as 20-7023
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL JERMAINE GREENE
Defendant / Appellee:
WVDOC, SUPERINTENDENT SHELLY SEARLS and COMMISSIONER BETSY C. JIVIDEN
Norwood v. Jividen et al
as 2:2020cv00350
Defendant:
Donald F. Ames, Wexford, Inc., Daniel L. Conn and others
Plaintiff:
Travis R. Norwood
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Greene v. David Ballard
as 20-6454
Defendant / Appellee:
SARAH COOPER, Psy. Dr./MHU Staff, SHANNON COLEMAN, MHU Staff, KEN BOWLIN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL JERMAINE GREENE
Kereem Randolph v. Betsy Jividen
as 20-6419
Defendant / Appellee:
BETSY C. JIVIDEN, JESSICA THORNHILL, J. T. BINION and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KEREEM RANDOLPH
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.
