Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Mark Burgess v. Michael Reddix, et al
as 14-60234
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARK BURGESS
Defendant - Appellee:
DR. MICHAEL REDDIX, Private Prison Medical Contractor, DR. CARL FAULKS, Private Prison Medical Contractor, DAVID PETRIE, MDOC Legal Claims Adjudicator and others
Winding v. Graham et al
as 3:2013cv00426
Plaintiff:
James C. Winding
Defendant:
Joyce Graham , E. L. Sparkman, David Petrie and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bryant v. Birdtail et al
as 4:2013cv00109
Plaintiff:
Willie Lee Bryant
Defendant:
J. Birdtail, Jones Williams, Lakisha Warren and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bryant v. Birdtail et al
as 3:2013cv01028
Plaintiff:
Willie Lee Bryant
Defendant:
J. Birdtail , S. Jones , Lakisha Warren and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Winding v. Lard et al
as 4:2013cv00078
Defendant:
V. Lard, J. Webb, L. Prude and others
Plaintiff:
James C. Winding
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McClain v. Lard et al
as 4:2013cv00077
Plaintiff:
Nigel McClain
Defendant:
V. Lard, J. Webb, L. Prude and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burgess v. Reddix et al
as 3:2013cv01006
Plaintiff:
Mark Burgess
Defendant:
Michael Reddix , Carl Faulks , David Petrie and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Winding v. MTC, Inc. et al
as 4:2013cv00032
Plaintiff:
James Winding
Defendant:
MTC, Inc., H. Hollie, T. Naylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Winding v. Lard et al
as 4:2013cv00025
Plaintiff:
James C. Winding and Nigel McClain
Defendant:
V. Lard, J. Webb, L. Prude and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Winding v. Breakfield et al
as 4:2013cv00011
Plaintiff:
James Winding
Defendant:
J. Breakfield, F. Ovalle, F. Shaw and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
