Cases 71 - 80 of 100
Gilliam v. Southard, et al.
as 4:2010cv01484
Plaintiff:
Preston Gilliam
Defendant:
Chesley Bruce Southard , Donald Blankenship and Phelps County
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Phelps-Roper v. Bullock
as 4:2010cv01125
Plaintiff:
Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Defendant:
Daniel R. Bullock
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Aaron v. Phelps County et al
as 4:2009cv02091
Plaintiff:
Thomas J. Aaron
Defendant:
Phelps County, Missouri, Phelps County Sheriff's Department, Donald Blankenship and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Phelps v. United States of America
as 4:2009cv01661
Petitioner:
Kelly L. Phelps
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Phelps-Roper v. City of Manchester, Missouri
as 4:2009cv01298
Plaintiff:
Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Defendant:
Manchester, Missouri, City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Phelps-Roper et al v. Pevely, Missouri, City of
as 4:2009cv01299
Plaintiff:
Shirley L. Phelps-Roper and Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Defendant:
Pevely, Missouri, City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Phelps-Roper v. Ballwin, Missouri, City of
as 4:2009cv01295
Plaintiff:
Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Defendant:
Ballwin, Missouri, City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Phelps-Roper v. Charlack, City of, Missouri
as 4:2009cv01297
Defendant:
Charlack, City of, Missouri
Plaintiff:
Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Phelps-Roper v. Berkeley, Missouri, City of
as 4:2009cv01296
Defendant:
Berkeley, Missouri, City of
Plaintiff:
Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Phelps-Roper v. Riverview,Village of
as 4:2009cv01082
Plaintiff:
Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Defendant:
Riverview,Village of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
