Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Wall v. R.E. Barrows Jr. Treatment Center Medical Staff et al
as 3:2020cv00701
Defendant:
M.D. Physician, R.E. Barrows Jr. Treatment Center Medical Staff, N. Practitioner and others
Plaintiff:
Curtis Wall
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Momolu Sirleaf v. David Robinson
as 17-6014
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MOMOLU V.S. SIRLEAF
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID ROBINSON, in their official, and individual capacities, CURTIS WALL, in their official, and individual capacities and HAROLD CLARKE, in their official, and individual capacities
Momolu Sirleaf v. David Robinson
as 16-7357
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MOMOLU V.S. SIRLEAF, ERIC L. PROSHA, JOHN KING and others
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID ROBINSON, CURTIS WALL, M. VOSBURG and others
Curtis Wall v. Carolyn W Colvin
as 3:2016cv01374
Plaintiff:
Curtis Wall
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Rosas v. Robinson et al
as 3:2016cv00165
Plaintiff:
Peter Rosas
Defendant:
David Robinson, Curtis Wall, M. Vosburg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Prosha v. Robinson et al
as 3:2016cv00163
Plaintiff:
Eric L. Prosha
Defendant:
David Robinson, Curtis Wall, M. Vosburg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Watson v. Robinson et al
as 3:2016cv00167
Plaintiff:
Ray Watson
Defendant:
David Robinson, Curtis Wall, M. Vosburg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
King v. Robinson et al
as 3:2016cv00164
Plaintiff:
John King
Defendant:
David Robinson, Curtis Wall, M. Vosburg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sessoms v. Robinson et al
as 3:2016cv00166
Plaintiff:
Ryan Sessoms
Defendant:
David Robinson, Curtis Wall, M. Vosburg and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sirleaf et al v. Robinson et al
as 3:2015cv00552
Plaintiff:
Momolu Sirleaf, Eric L. Prosha, John King and others
Defendant:
David Robinson, Curtis Wall, M. Vosburg 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.
