Cases 21 - 27 of 27
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION (GEORGE T. RODGERS)
as 1:2010cv05203
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Plaintiff:
GEORGE T. RODGERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION (CEDRIC ROYAL)
as 1:2010cv05205
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Plaintiff:
CEDRIC ROYAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION(DAVID GILL)
as 1:2010cv02826
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Plaintiff:
DAVID GILL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
IN RE: BAYSIDE LITIGATION (Brian Hardy)
as 1:2009cv03739
Pecial_master:
JOHN W. BISSELL
Defendant:
BAYSIDE STATE PRISON , ROBERT ROES 1 TO 50 , JOHN SMITHS 1 TO 15 and others
Plaintiff:
BRIAN HARDY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Owens, et al v. Horn, et al
as 08-4514
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NATHANIEL OWENS, CLIFFORD FUTCH, EARL M. COTTON and others
Defendant - Appellee:
MARTIN HORN, Former Secretary for the Department of Corrections, JEFFREY BEARD, Secretary for the Department of Corrections, THOMAS FULCOMER, Deputy Secretary of the Western Region and others
Owens, et al v. Horn, et al
as 08-4513
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NATHANIEL OWENS and DERRICK WARREN
Plaintiff - Non-Participating:
EARL M. COTTON and CLIFFORD FUTCH
Defendant - Appellee:
MARTIN HORN, Former Secretary for the Department of Corrections, JEFFREY BEARD, Secretary for the Department of Corrections, THOMAS FULCOMER, Deputy Secretary of the Western Region and others
Owens, et al v. Horn, et al
as 3:2002cv00356
Plaintiff:
Clifford Futch
Defendant:
Martin F. Horn , Jeffery Beard , Thomas Fulcomer and others
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.
