Cases 1 - 10 of 28
John Ortiz-Kehoe v. Larry Royster, et al
as 24-1016
Plaintiff:
JOHN PATRICK ORTIZ-KEHOE
Defendant:
LARRY S. ROYSTER, Michigan Supreme Court Clerk, official and personal capacity and JULIE CLEMENT, Michigan Supreme Court Deputy Clerk, official and personal capacity
Ortiz-Kehoe #256263 v. Royster et al
as 1:2023cv00532
Plaintiff:
John Ortiz-Kehoe #256263
Defendant:
Larry S. Royster and Julie Clement
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
Montano v. Royster
as 1:2022cv01150
Plaintiff:
Mario Allan Montano
Defendant:
Larry S. Royster
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
Meeks #176401 v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2020cv00839
Plaintiff:
Anthony Meeks #176401
Defendant:
Shauna Dunning, Bridget M. McCormack, S. Campbell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anthony Meeks v. MDOC, et al
as 19-2240
Defendant / Appellee:
OFFICER MONROE, ARF, JEROME W. ZIMMER, Chief Court Clerk, LARRY S. ROYSTER, Court Clerk and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANTHONY MEEKS
Meeks v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2019cv12506
Plaintiff:
Anthony Meeks
Defendant:
Officer Monroe, Bridget M. McCormack, S. Campbell and others
Williams v. Meyer et al
as 2:2018cv10734
Plaintiff:
Roosevelt Williams
Defendant:
Inger Meyer, Larry S. Royster, Peter Dishnaw and others
Smiles #224987 v. Royster et al
as 2:2017cv00165
Plaintiff:
Charles Smiles #224987
Defendant:
Larry S. Royster and Inger Z. Meyer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nettles v. Michigan Supreme Court Clerk et al
as 1:2017cv00004
Plaintiff:
Beverley R. Nettles
Defendant:
Michigan Supreme Court Clerk, Larry S. Royster, Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Meyer et al
as 2:2016cv14194
Plaintiff:
Roosevelt Lashawn Williams
Defendant:
Inger Meyer, Larry S. Royster, Peter Dishnaw and others
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.
