Cases 1 - 9 of 9
JORGENSEN v. KOORS et al
as 1:2022cv02242
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JORGENSEN
Defendant:
MARK KOORS, DAVE DURANT, D. W. PARKER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SWEET v. NOEL et al
as 4:2019cv00009
Defendant:
MICHAEL LOONEY, MICHAEL HAMMOND, WILLIAM HOKE and others
Plaintiff:
JANICE SWEET
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GRAY et al v. VECTREN CORPORATION COMBINED NON-BARGAINING RETIREMENT PLAN et al
as 3:2015cv00031
Plaintiff:
MARK BOUCHIE, MICHAEL DUGAN, LARRY EBERHARD and others
Defendant:
VECTREN CORPORATION and VECTREN CORPORATION COMBINED NON-BARGAINING RETIREMENT PLAN
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
CRANE v. HOWE et al
as 4:2014cv00090
Interested Party:
DOUGLAS CRANE
Plaintiff:
TODD MICHAEL CRANE
Defendant:
JOHN DOES, KELLY HOGG, HOKE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CRANE v. LAWRENCEBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT
as 4:2014cv00065
Defendant:
DANIEL CRAIG, JOHN DOE, KELLY HOGG and others
Plaintiff:
TODD MICHAEL CRANE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
KINNINGHAM v. EVERSON et al
as 3:2014cv00003
Defendant:
ADVANCED CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE, DR. EVERSON, DR. WILLIAM HOKE and others
Plaintiff:
SHAWN KINNINGHAM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BRADLEY VAN-PATTEN et al v. INDIANA PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.
as 1:2014cv00050
Plaintiff:
STACEY BRADLEY VAN-PATTEN, VALERIE CARY, CONNIE CLARK and others
Defendant:
INDIANA PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
IN RE: FAILURE TO COMPLY
as 1:2010mc00069
Respondent:
TIMOTHY PAUL ALCORN, PAUL NEJAT ALP, DANIEL BAXTER WANN ALTMAN and others
In Re:
IN THE MATTER OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS AND/OR NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES
Hoke v. AT&T Mobility LLC
as 2:2010cv00006
Plaintiff:
Martin Hoke
Defendant:
AT&T Mobility LLC
Cause Of Action: 07 U.S.C. § 151 The Tax Freedom Act
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.
