Cases 21 - 30 of 33
Thomas v. Hoppower et al
as 2:2013cv00735
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Thomas
Defendant:
Michael Hoppower, Lafayette Probation & Parole Division, Bobby Jindal and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. Sood et al
as 1:2012cv01207
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Thomas
Defendant:
Kul Sood, Lois Lindorff, Ruth Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Wahl et al
as 3:2011cv50111
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Thomas
Defendant:
Jill Wahl, Dominguez, Imhot Carter and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Richards v. Banks et al
as 5:2010cv00134
Plaintiff:
James Richards
Defendant:
Jacquelyn Banks, Gabriel Walker, Unknown OBrien and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell Thomas v. Theresa Clay, et al
as 10-2518
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MITCHELL THOMAS
Defendant - Appellee:
THERESA CLAY and DIANE MORRISON, in their individual capacities
Hillsman v. Thomas
as 5:2010cv01190
Plaintiff:
Robert Hillsman, Jr
Defendant:
Charles Mitchell Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Thomas v. 10470 Bailey Correctional Officer et al
as 1:2010cv01766
Defendant:
10470 Bailey Correctional Officer, Queens County Court and The Department of Correction Security Under Their Care, Custody, and Control
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Thomas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Thomas v. 10470 Bailey Correctional Officer et al
as 1:2010cv02909
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Thomas
Defendant:
10470 Bailey Correctional Officer, The Department of Correction Security Under Their Care, Custody, and Control and Queens County Court
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas v. Bailey et al
as 1:2009cv10222
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Thomas
Defendant:
Bailey, Queens County Court and Rikers Island
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Mitchell Thomas v. Andy Ott
as 09-3652
Petitioner - Appellant:
MITCHELL THOMAS
Respondent - Appellee:
ANDY OTT and LISA MADIGAN
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.
