Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Harrell v. Holley et al
as 5:2022ct03078
Plaintiff:
Cola Harrell and Cola Terrell Harrell
Defendant:
John Holley, Matt Roebuck, Dewayne Outlaw and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Roebuck v. Glass et al
as 4:2018cv01498
Defendant:
Corizon Health Care, Dale Glass, Kristi Walther and others
Plaintiff:
Laddie L. Roebuck
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
ROEBUCK v. PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2017cv01930
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY ROEBUCK
Defendant:
PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT , WALTER BARTLE , NATHAN RAMOS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
COLEMAN v. CITY OF LONG BRANCH et al
as 3:2015cv07314
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM COLEMAN
Defendant:
CITY OF LONG BRANCH, ADAMS SCHNEIDER, JASON ROEBUCK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Honaker v. Sears Roebuck and Company et al
as 4:2015cv00314
Plaintiff:
Christopher Michael Honaker
Defendant:
Sears Roebuck and Company, Alberto M Martinez and Benjamin Saxton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
COLEMAN v. SCHNEIDER et al
as 3:2015cv03539
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM COLEMAN
Defendant:
ADAMS SCHNEIDER, JASON ROEBUCK, NICHOLAS ROMANO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HOLMES v. FINK et al
as 1:2015cv00212
Plaintiff:
ELLISON RAY HOLMES
Defendant:
GARY L. FINK, AMY M. LEEPER, RICHARD HADLEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Holmes v. Fink et al
as 5:2015ct03061
Plaintiff:
Ellison Ray Holmes
Defendant:
Gary L. Fink, Amy M. Leeper, Richard Hadley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mario Roebuck v. Randall Mathena
as 11-7263
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARIO ROEBUCK
Defendant - Appellee:
RANDALL MATHENA, Chief, JULIUS WILSON, Director Virgin Islands, HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director (VDOC) and others
Roebuck v. Aramark et al
as 2:2011cv02789
Plaintiff:
Calvin Roebuck
Defendant:
Aramark, Shelby County Jail, A.C. Wharton 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.
