Cases 21 - 30 of 56
Crump v. Dotson et al
as 1:2021cv00003
Defendant:
FNU Swink, FNU Dotson, FNU Brookshire and others
Plaintiff:
Ramar Dion Benjamin Crump
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROGERS v. CAMPBELL et al
as 1:2020cv00032
Plaintiff:
ROBERT H. ROGERS
Defendant:
THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA GUILFORD COUNTY, CHIEF WAYNE SCOTT, EMERALD M. CAMPBELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DESPAIGNE ZULVETA v. THE BARRETT FIRM, ET AL.
as 1:2019cv00978
Plaintiff:
ARMANDO DESPASAIGNE ZULVETA and ARMANDO DESPAIGNE ZULVETA
Defendant:
THE BARRETT FIRM, ERIK K. ENGLEBARDT, CLAWSON AND STAUBES, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
CRUMP v. BERRYHILL
as 1:2019cv00466
Plaintiff:
CHRISTINA CRUMP
Interested Party:
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Defendant:
NANCY BERRYHILL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 206
TUCKER v. BAILEY et al
as 1:2019cv00287
Defendant:
K. ADAMS, UNKNOWN NAMED WHITE MALE FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGIST, MILES KIVETT and others
Plaintiff:
CORNELIUS TUCKER, JR.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TUCKER v. BAILEY et al
as 1:2019cv00277
Defendant:
FORSYTH COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT., SMITH/KEEFE COMMISSARY/PROVIDER, CATRINA THOMPSON and others
Plaintiff:
CORNELIUS TUCKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
TUCKER v. CRAVEN et al
as 1:2019cv00246
Plaintiff:
CORNELIUS TUCKER, JR.
Defendant:
ADAMS, KEEFE, SGT. GUARD WHITT and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Martin v. Cooper et al
as 2:2019cv00002
Defendant:
Seth Edwards, Spencer Merriweather, Mike Waters and others
Plaintiff:
Antoine D. Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. LOVEJOY et al
as 1:2019cv00057
Defendant:
THOMAS FAGERLI, JASON CRUMP, OFFICER LOVEJOY and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT WAYNE SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fox v. Kinlisky et al
as 5:2018cv00078
Plaintiff:
Duane L. Fox
Defendant:
FNU Kinlisky, Christopher P. Mury, FNU Going and others
Cause Of Action: 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.
