Cases 1 - 10 of 15
MUDD v. JONES et al
as 4:2021cv00170
Plaintiff:
DAWUAN TERRELL MUDD and DIVINE SERENITY MOON
Defendant:
WARDEN DESHAWN JONES, SGT JUAN USQUIANO, LT PERNELL and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Banda v. Davis et al
as 1:2021cv02677
Plaintiff:
Alick Ricky Banda
Defendant:
Randy Davis, D. Horton, Chief of Security H. Walker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Horton v. Covington Police Department
as 1:2019cv05025
Plaintiff:
Brianna C. Horton
Defendant:
Covington Police Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Franklin et al v. Covington, GA, Police Department et al
as 1:2019cv04626
Defendant:
Pokey Daniels, Superior Court - Newton County Georgia, Q. Pitts and others
Plaintiff:
Brianna C. Horton and LaRance D. Franklin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robinson v. Horton et al
as 1:2019cv00294
Defendant:
K. Johnson, Ralph Austin, Nurse Logan and others
Plaintiff:
David Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Danglar v. DHS et al
as 1:2018cv05637
Plaintiff:
Lyncoln Danglar
Defendant:
DHS, Scott Pitman, W. Jackson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Charles v. Tillman
as 1:2017cv00480
Plaintiff:
Brandy Charles
Defendant:
Randy Tillman, H. Walker and Danny Horton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Goodman v. The Robert A. Deyton Detention Facility et al
as 1:2015cv01724
Plaintiff:
Tony Goodman
Defendant:
The Robert A. Deyton Detention Facility, The G.E.D. Group Inc., R. Cherry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Goodman v. The Robert A. Deyton Detention Facility et al
as 1:2015cv01468
Plaintiff:
Tony Goodman
Defendant:
The Robert A. Deyton Detention Facility, G.E.O. Group Inc., R. Cherry and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Horton v. Degennaro et al
as 1:2013cv03869
Plaintiff:
Charles Horton
Defendant:
Nicholas Degennaro, Charles Sedberry, David Benefield and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
