Cases 1 - 10 of 1,882
CASEY v. DIXON
as 4:2024cv00188
Plaintiff:
BRIAN M CASEY
Defendant:
RICKY DIXON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Adam Casey v. Nancie Williams
as 24-1371
Plaintiff:
ADAM NICHOLAS CASEY
Defendant:
NANCIE WILLIAMS, D.B.A. Judge "JDR" Warren County Court, Juvenile Domestic Relations and UNKNOWN, Individual at the Court Hearing Representing Department of Social Services Child Support Enforcement Division
Kepler et al v. NaphCare Incorporated et al
as 4:2024cv00220
Plaintiff:
Karina Kepler, Carlin Casey and Mary Hutchinson
Defendant:
NaphCare Incorporated, Pima, County of, Chris Nanos and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tabitha McKenzie v. Casey Barren, et al
as 24-11106
Plaintiff:
TABITHA MCKENZIE
Defendant:
CASEY T. BARREN, ERIC LOVE, GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA and others
Ralston v. Jones et al
as 5:2024cv05082
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Wayne Ralston
Defendant:
Judge Casey Jones, Judge Mark Lindsay, Corey Anderson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MARTIN v. BYRD et al
as 2:2024cv00103
Plaintiff:
EARL MARTIN
Defendant:
SAMUEL BYRD, CASEY CAMBEL, BARBARA RIGGS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILLIAMS v. FENI et al
as 1:2024cv00548
Plaintiff:
CASEY L. WILLIAMS
Defendant:
A. FENI, AKENADI, UNKNOWN OFFICER (1) and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Tabitha McKenzie v. Casey Barren, et al
as 24-10852
Plaintiff:
TABITHA MCKENZIE
Defendant:
CASEY T. BARREN, ERIC LOVE, GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA and others
Tabitha McKenzie v. Chief Judge, et al
as 24-10899
Plaintiff:
TABITHA MCKENZIE
Defendant:
CHIEF JUDGE, CASEY T. BARREN and LISA TANNER
Johnson v. Semple et al
as 3:2024cv00389
Plaintiff:
Carvaughn Johnson
Defendant:
Scott Semple, Leo Arnone, James Dzurenda and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
