Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Gibson v. Castellanos, et al.
as 24-2280
Plaintiff:
REGINALD GIBSON
Defendant:
E. CASTELLANOS, Correctional Officer and C. RILEY, Correctional Officer
Reginald Gibson v. Kevin Ludwig, et al
as 23-3384
Plaintiff / Appellant:
REGINALD GIBSON
Defendant / Appellee:
KEVIN LUDWIG, Mailroom Supervisor at Institution for Allen Correctional, JOHN DOE, Mailroom Employee for Allen Correctional Institution, KELLY RIEHLE, Assistant Chief Inspector for the Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections and others
Gibson v. Ludwig et al
as 3:2022cv02082
Plaintiff:
Reginald Gibson
Defendant:
Lt. Kevin Ludwig, John Doe, Kelly Riehle and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985 Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights
Gibson v. Ludwig et al
as 1:2022cv06338
Plaintiff:
Reginald Gibson
Defendant:
Kevin Ludwig, John Doe, Kelly Riehle and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985 Civil Rights
Reginald Gibson v. Stark County, OH, et al
as 21-4002
Plaintiff / Appellant:
REGINALD GIBSON
Defendant / Appellee:
STARK COUNTY, OH
Reginald Gibson v. Ohio Department of Rehabilita, et al
as 21-3999
Plaintiff / Appellant:
REGINALD GIBSON
Defendant / Appellee:
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION and DOCTOR ANDREW D. EDDY, in his individual and official capacities
Gibson v. Stark County et al
as 5:2021cv01179
Plaintiff:
Reginald Gibson
Defendant:
Stark County and Service List
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(PC) Gibson v. Castellanos et al
as 1:2021cv00794
Plaintiff:
Reginald Gibson
Defendant:
C. Riley and E. Castellanos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gibson v. Stark County et al
as 1:2021cv01701
Plaintiff:
Reginald Gibson
Defendant:
Stark County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
GIBSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv48723
Plaintiff:
REGINALD GIBSON
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
