Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Mabe v. Coleman et al
as 1:2021cv00121
Defendant:
D. Raines, P. Lampman, I. Terry and others
Plaintiff:
Larry Edward Mabe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mabe v. MEDIKO et al
as 7:2020cv00498
Plaintiff:
Jared Daniel Mabe
Defendant:
Josh Hayes, Zach Grizzle, Brian Parks and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mabe v. Mediko et al
as 7:2019cv00860
Defendant:
Zack Grizzel, Major Parks, Stuart Scott and others
Plaintiff:
Jared D. Mabe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Crawley v. Mabe et al
as 7:2019cv00613
Defendant:
John Doe, Autumn C. Hawks, Judge Gerald Mabe and others
Plaintiff:
David Crawley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mabe v. SWVRJ (Duffield) Facility
as 7:2019cv00560
Plaintiff:
Jared D Mabe
Defendant:
Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority and SWVRJ (Duffield) Facility
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lamberson v. Wytheville Police Department et al
as 7:2018cv00534
Defendant:
Board of Supervisors of Wythe County, Virginia, Gerald E. Mabe, II, Scot S. Farthing and others
Plaintiff:
David Allen Lamberson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Lamberson v. Wytheville Police Department et al
as 3:2018cv00677
Defendant:
Board of Supervisors of Wythe County, Virginia, Gerald E. Mabe, II, Scot S. Farthing and others
Plaintiff:
David Allen Lamberson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Mabe v. Astrue
as 4:2012cv00052
Defendant:
Michael Astrue
Plaintiff:
Gregory M. Mabe
Interested Party:
SSA General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2011cv00334
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Jackson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 7:2010cv00392
Defendant:
Harley Chain, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Mr. G. Friss and others
Plaintiff:
William A. Jackson
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.
