Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Hulsey v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2020cv11078
Defendant:
Federal Medical Center Fort Devens and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Plaintiff:
Olin Dale Hulsey
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Spatig v. Grondolsky et al
as 1:2017cv11023
Plaintiff:
Max Spatig
Defendant:
Jeffrey Grondolsky, Fort Devens Federal Medical Center, Jane Does and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Levesque v. Fort Devens Federal Medical Center
as 1:2017cv10103
Plaintiff:
Andre Levesque
Defendant:
Fort Devens Federal Medical Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pavao v. United States of America et al
as 1:2015cv11114
Plaintiff:
Luis Pavao
Defendant:
United States of America, Federal Medical Center Fort Devens, Barnett and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Luis Olivares v. Mark Vargo, et al
as 14-3713
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Luis Olivares
Defendant - Appellee:
Mark Vargo, Federal States Attorney, Neil Fulton, Brendon Johnson and others
Olivares v. Vargo et al
as 5:2014cv05055
Plaintiff:
Luis Olivares
Defendant:
Mark Vargo, Niel Fulton, Brendon Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Olivares v. Fort Devens
as 5:2013cv05037
Plaintiff:
Luis Olivares
Defendant:
Fort Devens
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Graham, Jr. v. Grondolsky, et al
as 12-1361
Petitioner - Appellant:
EMMETT MADISON GRAHAM, JR.
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES, JEFFREY GRONDOLSKY, Warden, Fort Devens, HARLEY LAPPIN and others
Warren Lee v. Bureau of Prisons, et al
as 10-5400
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Warren Antonio Lee
Defendant - Appellee:
Bureau of Prisons, Harley G. Lappin, in his official and individual capacities as director of Bureau of Prisons, Probation Office, of Guam and others
Wattleton v. Kelly et al
as 4:2010cv40199
Plaintiff:
David Earl Wattleton
Defendant:
Kelly and Fort Devens Federal Medical Center
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.
