Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Browne v. Booth
as 3:2023cv00093
Plaintiff:
Edgar Bachman Browne
Defendant:
Cpl Edward Booth
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Newell v. Tate et al
as 5:2022cv00277
Plaintiff:
Leroy Lee Newell, Jr.
Defendant:
DiDymus Tate, Prime Care Health Service, Lt. Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Woody v. Southern Regional Jail and Correctional Center et al
as 5:2022cv00067
Plaintiff:
Percy Ryshawn Woody
Defendant:
Southern Regional Jail and Correctional Center, Fleshman, Merithith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Greene v. Justice et al
as 5:2021cv00163
Plaintiff:
Michael Jermaine Greene
Defendant:
Randolph County, Jim Justice, Betsy C. Jividen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Greene v. Feaster et al
as 5:2021cv00140
Plaintiff:
Michael J. Greene
Defendant:
Sidney Feaster, Governor Jim Justice, Randolph County and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Damron v. Major D. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00085
Plaintiff:
Jonathan T. Damron, Randy Howerton, Brandon Michel Lane and others
Defendant:
Southern Regional Jail and Correctional Center, Sgt. Cox, Corp. Sturgil and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. Major D. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00115
Defendant:
Corp. Mitchum, Corp. Hanes, Corp. Pack and others
Plaintiff:
Brandon Michel Lane
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Howerton v. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00117
Defendant:
Corp. Mitchum, Corp. Pack, Corp. Sampson and others
Plaintiff:
Randy Howerton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lane v. Major D. J. et al
as 5:2021cv00114
Defendant:
Corp. Mitchum, Corp. Hanes, Corp. Pack and others
Plaintiff:
Floyd Michel Lane
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shy v. Adams et al
as 3:2019cv00172
Defendant:
Ashley Cambell, Angie Booth and Ryan Adams
Plaintiff:
Christopher Alexander Shy
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.
