Cases 1 - 10 of 160
Howell v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, et al
as 24-1368
Plaintiff:
CURTIS L. HOWELL
Defendant:
MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, MICHELLE WU and BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
Howell v. Pine Street Inn, et al
as 24-1369
Plaintiff:
CURTIS L. HOWELL
Defendant:
PINE STREET INN, MICHELLE WU and BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
Strong v. Boston Police Department A-7
as 1:2024cv11031
Plaintiff:
Gregory M Strong
Defendant:
Boston Police Department A-7
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Gamble Williams v. Boston Police Department et al
as 1:2024cv10701
Plaintiff:
Theodore Gamble Williams
Defendant:
Boston Police Department, Boston Police Officer John Doe and Boston Police Jane Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Howell v. Boston Medical Center Hospital, et al
as 24-1142
Plaintiff:
CURTIS L. HOWELL
Defendant:
BOSTON MEDICAL CENTER, BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT and MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL
Howell v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, et al
as 24-1144
Plaintiff:
CURTIS L. HOWELL
Defendant:
MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, MICHELLE WU and BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
Howell v. Boston Police Department, et al
as 24-1129
Plaintiff:
CURTIS L. HOWELL
Defendant:
BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY and PLANET FITNESS
Mazza v. City Of Boston et al
as 1:2024cv10333
Plaintiff:
Anthony Mazza
Defendant:
City Of Boston, Frank J. Olbrys, Edward Kennealy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Constant v. Cox et al
as 1:2024cv10162
Plaintiff:
Kahli Constant
Defendant:
Michael A. Cox, State Police, Continuum of Care Bridge over the Troubled Waters and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Pinney v. Police of La Salle Illinois, et al
as 24-1035
Plaintiff:
JOHNATHAN PINNEY, a/k/a Gitapushy Val Angel
Defendant:
LASALLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, LASALLE COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY, LASALLE COUNTY COURT and others
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.
