Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Muhammad v. Wiles
as 23-50786
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Bilal Muhammad
Defendant / Appellee:
Richard Wiles, El Paso County Sheriff, Marco Vargas, Kevin Lanahan and others
Robinson v. Maloney et al
as 2:2022cv02126
Plaintiff:
Carl Robinson
Defendant:
Corey Maloney, Scott Flannery, . Meeks and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bernard v. Illinois Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2020cv50413
Defendant:
Sgt. Mrs. Rodriguez, Mrs. Russell, Mrs. Heferfinger and others
Plaintiff:
Eric E. Bernard
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. Bureau of Health Care Services et al
as 1:2020cv01796
Defendant:
Lori White, Bernadette Mason, Newton and others
Plaintiff:
Carl Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROBINSON v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2020cv04529
Defendant:
OFFICER DAVE HENRY, MAYOR MICHAEL NUTTER, THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Plaintiff:
CARL ROBINSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. Delbalso et al
as 1:2020cv01171
Defendant:
John Steinhart, Sgt. Torres, Correct Care Solutions and others
Plaintiff:
Carl Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Muhammad v. Wiles et al
as 3:2019cv00367
Defendant:
John Doe 1-125, Joanne Bernal, Aramark Services Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Bilal Muhammad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HAILEY v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 2:2019cv02171
Defendant:
CAPT. BERGER, P/O CARL ROBINSON, KATHLEEN A. MCLAUGHLIN and others
Plaintiff:
ALVIN MAURICE HAILEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2019cv00019
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. Dollar General Corporation et al
as 9:2018cv00780
Plaintiff:
Carl Robinson
Defendant:
Dollar General Corporation, Chenelle Austin, John Croft and others
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.
