Cases 11 - 20 of 39
Duffy v. Toussint et al
as 1:2022cv03571
Plaintiff:
Michael J Duffy
Defendant:
Mrs. Toussint, Skokie/Judge and Martha M. Pacold
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DUFFY v. USA
as 1:2020cv02684
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
JOSHUA SHANE DUFFY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Green v. Wagner et al
as 3:2020cv00965
Petitioner:
Logan Green
Respondent:
Stephanie Wagner and Sean Duffy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
King et al v. U.S. Marshal Service et al
as 3:2019cv01337
Defendant:
Haley Duffy, U.S. Marshal Service, Sheriff and others
Plaintiff:
Darren Jammal King, Jamal Christopher and Denzael Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Cook County et al
as 1:2019cv03076
Plaintiff:
Donche Hall, Jamon Dantzler, William Baber and others
Defendant:
John Doe and Cook County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jenkins v. Anderson et al
as 1:2019cv00700
Defendant:
Village of Lincolnshire, Mary E. Stanton, Greg Duffy and others
Plaintiff:
Ernest R. Jenkins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Duffie v. Diaz et al
as 1:2018cv07954
Defendant:
C/O Manis, C/O Diaz and Sgt. Carpenter
Plaintiff:
Cornelious Duffie
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PEARSON et al v. FLOYD COUNTY JAIL MEDICAL STAFF
as 4:2018cv00110
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER BRYANT, JAMES DUFFY, DARION DASHON HARRIS and others
Defendant:
FLOYD COUNTY JAIL MEDICAL STAFF
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kimberly Allen-Jones v. City of Decatur, et al
as 18-1038
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KIMBERLY E. ALLEN-JONES
Defendant - Appellee:
CITY OF DECATUR, OFFICER CLOSEN, OFFICER DUFFY and others
BERRY v. JAY, et al
as 2:2017cv00194
Plaintiff:
JAVON CROCKETT BERRY and JAVON LANCE CROCKETT BERRY
Defendant:
ROBERT BUGHER, KEITH BUTTS, CORIZON INC and others
Miscellaneou:
WABASH VALLEY E-FILE (COURT USE ONLY)
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.
