Cases 21 - 30 of 113
Owens v. Burtlow et al
as 1:2021cv02714
Plaintiff:
Nathanael Eugene Owens
Defendant:
Siobhan Burtlow, Joshua Lessar, Stevens and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scarver v. Williams
as 1:2021cv02149
Plaintiff:
Christopher J. Scarver
Defendant:
Dean Williams, Anthony A. DeCesaro, Marshall Griffith and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Griffith v. Elder et al
as 1:2021cv01756
Defendant:
Cy Gillespie and Bill Elder
Plaintiff:
Darlene Griffith
Interested Party:
CASE MANAGER/ INMATE COORDINATOR OF: Darlene Griffith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Montanez v. Caley et al
as 1:2021cv01714
Petitioner:
Sixto Montanez
Defendant:
Eddie Caley, Kristy Stansell, A. Dugger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Griffith v. Hamilton et al
as 1:2021cv01349
Defendant:
Rick Hamilton, High Country Roofing and Rick Hampton
Plaintiff:
Darlene Griffith
Interested Party:
CASE MANAGER/ INMATE COORDINATOR OF: Darlene Griffith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Eaves v. Polis et al
as 1:2021cv01269
Defendant:
Marshall Griffith, Gypsy Kelso, Jerry Roark and others
Plaintiff:
Rodney Douglas Eaves
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Yakas et al v. Roark et al
as 1:2021cv01210
Defendant:
Alison Morgan, CoreCivic, Inc., Joel Hart and others
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Pritchard and Joshua Yakas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Griffith et al v. I-Hop, Inc et al
as 1:2021cv01017
Defendant:
Dine Brands, Inc, United States Food and Drug Administration, I-Hop, Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Cohen Heath and Darlene Griffith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Griffith v. Carnell et al
as 1:2021cv00387
Defendant:
Andrew Prehm, CY Gillespie, Pete Carey and others
Plaintiff:
Darlene Griffith
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Yakas et al v. Roark et al
as 1:2020cv03818
Defendant:
Alison Morgan, Mo, Colorado Department of Corrections and others
Plaintiff:
Kathleen Pritchard and Joshua Yakas
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.
