Cases 1 - 10 of 17
MONKS v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2023cv01388
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER C. MONKS
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CENTURION MEDICAL and RECEPTION - DIAGNOSTIC CENTER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MONKS v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2023cv00114
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER CRAIG MONKS
Defendant:
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and CENTURION MEDICAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00391
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilites Act
MODESITT v. INDIANA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 1:2021cv01711
Plaintiff:
CHAD MODESITT
Defendant:
JULIA MONK, GEO GROUP INC., JESSICA DILLON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MONK v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2020cv02909
Plaintiff:
STANLEY MONK
Defendant:
COOK INCORPORATED, COOK MEDICAL LLC and WILLIAM COOK EUROPE APS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MONK v. COOK INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2019cv04059
Plaintiff:
CHARLES MONK
Defendant:
COOK MEDICAL LLC, COOK INCORPORATED and WILLIAM COOK EUROPE APS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
JACKSON v. MONK et al
as 2:2019cv00171
Defendant:
ROBERT CARTER, HERITAGE TRAILS CORRECTIONAL, DANIEL L. CONN and others
Plaintiff:
QUINTIN D. JACKSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BEATY v. THE GEO GROUP et al
as 1:2018cv04007
Defendant:
WARDEN EMERSON, MS MONK and GEO GROUP THE
Plaintiff:
ADAM T BEATY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Beaty v. GEO Group The et al
as 3:2018cv01012
Defendant:
Warden Emerson, Ms Monk and GEO Group The
Plaintiff:
Adam T Beaty
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
King v. Portage City of et al
as 2:2018cv00055
Plaintiff:
Larry King, III
Defendant:
Portage City of, Wendell Hite, Robert Demitroulas 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.
