Cases 1 - 10 of 294
Stanley Boclair v. Jacqueline Lashbrook, et al
as 24-1539
Plaintiff:
STANLEY BOCLAIR
Defendant:
JACQUELINE LASHBROOK, JOHN R. BALDWIN, BARRY MYERS and others
Travis Weston v. John Baldwin, et al
as 23-2804
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TRAVIS D. WESTON
Defendant / Appellee:
JOHN BALDWIN, JACQUELINE LASHBROOK, FRANK LAWRENCE and others
Stanley Boclair v. Jacqueline Lashbrook, et al
as 23-2602
Plaintiff / Appellant:
STANLEY BOCLAIR
Defendant / Appellee:
JACQUELINE LASHBROOK, JOHN R. BALDWIN, BARRY MYERS and others
Stanley Boclair v. Jacqueline Lashbrook, et al
as 23-1978
Plaintiff / Appellant:
STANLEY BOCLAIR
Defendant / Appellee:
JACQUELINE LASHBROOK, JOHN R. BALDWIN, BARRY MYERS and others
Steshawn Brisco v. Jacqueline Lashbrook, et al
as 22-1616
Plaintiff / Appellant:
STESHAWN BRISCO
Defendant / Appellee:
JACQUELINE LASHBROOK, Warden, Menard CC, ANGELA CRAIN, Medical Director, LISA GOLDMAN, Doctor, Mental Health Director and others
Mansour Mohammad v. Jacqueline Lashbrook, et al
as 22-1520
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MANSOUR MOHAMMAD
Defendant / Appellee:
JACQUELINE LASHBROOK, Warden, TIMOTHY MORRIS, REGGIE EPPLIN, Correctional Officer and others
Moore v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc. et al
as 3:2021cv01454
Plaintiff:
Shung Moore
Defendant:
Wexford Health Sources, Inc., Dr. Siddiqui, Reva Engelage and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Peters v. Rauner et al
as 3:2020cv00689
Defendant:
Dr. Pofeat, Mary Wilson, Jacqueline Lashbrook and others
Plaintiff:
Scott Peters
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thornton v. Baldwin et al
as 3:2020cv00518
Defendant:
C/O Dryden, Jacqueline Lashbrook, John Does, 1-15 and others
Plaintiff:
Charles E. Thornton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nelson v. Siddiqui et al
as 3:2020cv00429
Defendant:
Ryan Sutterer, Jacqueline Lashbrook, Kelly Pierce and others
Plaintiff:
Brandon Nelson
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.
