Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Travis Watson v. Joshua Stein
as 22-6720
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TRAVIS L. WATSON
Defendant / Appellee:
JOSHUA STEIN, ERIK A. HOOKS, KENNETH LASSITER and others
Travis Watson v. Erik Hooks
as 22-6691
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TRAVIS L. WATSON
Defendant / Appellee:
ERIK A. HOOKS, Former North Carolina Department of Public Safety Secretary, JOSHUA STEIN, North Carolina Attorney General, KENNETH LASSITER, Former Director of North Carolina Prisons and others
WATSON v. HARMON et al
as 1:2021cv00877
Plaintiff:
TRAVIS L. WATSON
Defendant:
LISA HARMON, JANE DOE, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Christopher Mosby v. Clarence DelForge, III
as 21-7490
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER MOSBY, a/k/a C. Joseph Mosbey
Defendant / Appellee:
CLARENCE JOE DELFORGE, III and ERIK A. HOOKS
Douglas Symmes, Jr. v. Capt. Covington
as 21-7438
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DOUGLAS ROY SYMMES, JR.
Defendant / Appellee:
CAPT. COVINGTON, JERRY INGRAM, JR., KATY POOLE and others
Christopher Mosby v. Clarence DelForge, III
as 20-7831
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER MOSBY, a/k/a C. Joseph Mosbey
Defendant / Appellee:
ERIK A. HOOKS and CLARENCE JOE DELFORGE, III
Roderick Nunn v. Alvin Keller, Jr.
as 11-6320
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RODERICK MYRON NUNN
Defendant - Appellee:
ALVIN WILLIAM KELLER, JR., Secretary of the N. C. Department of Correction, CLARENCE JOE DELFORGE, III, Deputy Attorney General, ORLANDO HUDSON, Durham County Superior Court Judge and others
Bennie Mack, Jr. v. Carl Fox
as 09-6599
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BENNIE A. MACK, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
CARL FOX, In his individual capacity and in his former official capacity as District Attorney, JAMES WOODALL, In his individual capacity and in his official capacity as District Attorney for the 15B Prosecutorial district of NC, WADE BARBER, Retired Superior Court Judge in his individual capacity 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.
