Cases 41 - 50 of 30,755
Leist v. Griffin et al
as 4:2024cv00578
Plaintiff:
Zachery Leist
Defendant:
Tyler Griffin, C. James and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carter v. Semple et al
as 3:2024cv00731
Plaintiff:
Joseph Carter
Defendant:
Semple and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Giles v. Hughes et al
as 1:2024cv01159
Plaintiff:
Anthony Maurice Giles
Defendant:
Latoya Hughes, Chance Jones, Cherryle Hinthorne and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cotton v. Hughes et al
as 2:2024cv02084
Plaintiff:
James Cotton
Defendant:
Latoya Hughes, Felicia Atkins, Chase Wilhelm and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Reed v. Doe
as 3:2024cv00219
Plaintiff:
Tommie James Reed, Jr.
Defendant:
John Doe
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
McDowell v. Plymouth Township Police Department et al
as 2:2024cv11029
Plaintiff:
Danny Eugene McDowell
Defendant:
Plymouth Township Police Department, Plymouth Township Police Department, Commissioner of, Plymouth Township Police Department, Chief of and others
MATHEWS v. STREEIT et al
as 3:2024cv00167
Plaintiff:
CARLTON XAVIER MATHEWS
Defendant:
J STREEIT and JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00252
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rollins v. Phillips et al
as 3:2024cv00486
Plaintiff:
Steve Rollins
Defendant:
Amber L. Phillips and John Doe #1
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MARSHALL v. WADAS et al
as 2:2024cv00140
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, J. WADAS, BOP and others
Plaintiff:
BRIAN K. MARSHALL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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.
