Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Latham v. Hurley et al
as 1:2024cv10130
Plaintiff:
Lincoln Latham
Defendant:
Tina Hurley, Charlene Bonner, Tonomey Coleman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mahdi v. Ryan et al
as 3:2023cv30040
Plaintiff:
Abdul Jaleel Mahdi, Irvin and Irvin William Jones
Defendant:
Mathew Ryan, Jr., Dianme F. Dillon, Francis John Good and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Mahdi v. Ryan et al
as 1:2023cv02710
Plaintiff:
Abdul Jaleel Mahdi, Irvin and Irvin William Jones
Defendant:
Mathew Ryan, Jr., Dianme F. Dillon, Francis John Good and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Wilborn v. Bonner, et al
as 21-1000
Defendant / Appellee:
TINA HURLEY, SHEILA DUPRE, PAUL MICHAEL TRESELER and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRUCE WILBORN
Wilborn v. Bonner et al
as 1:2019cv12050
Defendant:
Shelia Dupre, Tina Hurley, Tonomey Coleman and others
Plaintiff:
Bruce Wilborn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Estep v. Baker, et al
as 19-1211
Defendant / Appellee:
TINA HURLEY, INA HOWARD-HOGAN, PAUL MICHAEL TRESELER and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
THOMAS R. ESTEP
Doucette v. Treseler et al
as 1:2018cv11817
Defendant:
Tina Hurley, Lucy M. Soto, Sheila Dupre and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Doucette
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wilborn v. Treseler et al
as 1:2017cv10858
Plaintiff:
Bruce Wilborn
Defendant:
Paul Treseler, Charlene Bonner, Tomoney Coleman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodriguez v. Massachusetts Parole Board, et al
as 17-1410
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSE RODRIGUEZ
Defendant - Appellee:
MASSACHUSETTS PAROLE BOARD, CHARLENE BONNER, JOSH WALL and others
Rodriguez v. Massachusetts Parole Board et al
as 1:2016cv11113
Plaintiff:
Jose Rodriguez
Defendant:
Massachusetts Parole Board, Charlene Bonner, Josh Wall 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.
