Cases 1 - 10 of 25
Harper v. State of Nebraska et al
as 8:2024cv00106
Plaintiff:
Clyde Ernest Harper
Defendant:
State of Nebraska and State of Iowa
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Holland v. Lancaster County Sheriffs Department et al
as 4:2018cv03156
Plaintiff:
Ernest E. Holland
Defendant:
J. Schwarz, Matthew F. Meyerle and Lancaster County Sheriffs Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harper v. Coffey. et al
as 4:2017cv03030
Defendant:
Judge Peter C. Bataillon, Judge Coffey, Douglas County and others
Plaintiff:
Clyde Ernest Harper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harper v. State of Nebraska
as 8:2017cv00058
Plaintiff:
Clyde Ernest Harper
Defendant:
State of Nebraska
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Medina v. John Doe et al
as 8:2016cv00334
Defendant:
Jane Doe and John Doe
Plaintiff:
Ernest Medina
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Medina v. Trottrer et al
as 8:2016cv00129
Defendant:
Browning, Frank and Helen Trottrer
Plaintiff:
Ernest Medina
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Medina v. Thurber et al
as 8:2015cv00442
Plaintiff:
Ernest Medina
Defendant:
Michael Thurber and Kevin Witcher
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Medina v. Lancaster County et al
as 8:2015cv00436
Defendant:
Lancaster County and Lancaster County Public Defenders Office
Plaintiff:
Ernest Medina
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Medina v. Thurber et al
as 8:2015cv00332
Defendant:
Chief Medical Officer, Brenda Fisher, Bradley Johnson and others
Plaintiff:
Ernest Medina
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harper v. NE DOC
as 8:2015cv00301
Petitioner:
Clyde Ernest Harper
Respondent:
NE DOC
Interested Party:
Nebraska Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
