Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Duane Johnson v. US
as 19-7551
Defendant / Appellee:
SUHASINI SHAH, sued in her individual capacity, IGNATIUS HALL, sued in his or her individual capacity, SALAM AKBAR, sued in his or her individual capacity and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DUANE JOSEPH JOHNSON
Johnson v. United States Of America et al
as 1:2016cv01097
Plaintiff:
Duane Joseph Johnson
Defendant:
United States Of America, Suhasini N. Shah, M.D., Katherine Laybourn, M.D. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kirk Loney v. Mark Sim
as 12-6568
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KIRK L. LONEY
Defendant - Appellee:
MARK SIMS, Officer, Richmond Police Department, sued in both official and individual capacity, UNKNOWN # 1, Officers, Fed. State and City, DREW, Captain, Richmond Police Department, sued in both official and individual capacity and others
Defendant:
DOUGLAS L. WILDER, Mayor, sued in both official and individual capacity, RODNEY MONROE, Ex-Richmond Police Chief, sued in both official and individual capacity, M. A. HARRISON, Officer, Badge #1925, Richmond Police Department, sued in both official and individual capacity and others
Kirk Loney v. Douglas Wilder
as 10-7317
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KIRK L. LONEY
Defendant - Appellee:
DOUGLAS L. WILDER, Mayor, sued in both official and individual capacity, RODNEY MONROE, Ex-Richmond Police Chief, sued in both official and individual capacity, MARK SIMS, Officer, Richmond Police Department, sued in both official and individual capacity and others
Solan v. Rice et al
as 3:2009cv00643
Plaintiff:
David Solan
Defendant:
Benjamin Rice, John/Jane Doe 1, Patricia R. Stansberry and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question Bivens-Prisoner
Loney v. Wilder et al
as 3:2008cv00820
Plaintiff:
Kirk Lee Loney
Defendant:
Douglas L. Wilder, Rodney Monroe, Mark Sims and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
