Cases 11 - 20 of 135
Meeks v. DOE et al
as 4:2023cv01240
Plaintiff:
Frisco Meeks
Defendant:
JOHN DOE, Daniel Golden, Lauren Colom and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mokshefski v. Smith et al
as 3:2023cv01071
Plaintiff:
Michael Mokshefski
Defendant:
Jeffrey R. Smith, Todd Haskins, Prime Care and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lee v. Mason et al
as 4:2023cv00799
Plaintiff:
Taji Lee
Defendant:
B. Mason, Corrections Officer Miller, Corrections Officer Young and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Lee v. Mason et al
as 4:2023cv00793
Plaintiff:
Taji Lee
Defendant:
B. Mason, Correctional Officer Miller, Corrections Officer Young and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00195
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Payne v. Doe #1 et al
as 1:2022cv01876
Plaintiff:
Joshua I Payne
Defendant:
John Doe #1, John Doe #2, John Doe #3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barber v. Doe 1 et al
as 1:2022cv01840
Plaintiff:
Henry Barber
Defendant:
Correctional Officer John Doe 1, Correctional Officer John Doe 2 and Registered Nurse Brand
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lee-Chima v. Carolan et al
as 3:2022cv01801
Plaintiff:
Kasheyon Lee-Chima
Defendant:
E.C. Carolan, Carmac, John Doe # 1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Timmons v. O'Boyle et al
as 1:2022cv01497
Plaintiff:
Brandon Timmons
Defendant:
CO3 O'Boyle, John Doe #1, John Doe #2 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rom v. Kyle et al
as 1:2022cv01456
Plaintiff:
Sunny Rom
Defendant:
S. Kyle, Corrections Officer Doe 1 and Corrections Officer John Doe 2
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.
