Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Foust v. Pennsylvania State Police Officer John Doe 1 et al
as 4:2024cv00155
Plaintiff:
Rodney E. Foust
Defendant:
Pennsylvania State Police Officer John Doe 1, Pennsylvania State Police Officer John Doe 2 and Pennsylvania State Police Officer John Doe 3
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Macdonald v. Massachusetts State Police et al
as 1:2022cv12235
Plaintiff:
Kinley Macdonald
Defendant:
Chief Massachusetts State Police, State Police Officer Clark, State Police Officer John Doe 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Vasquez v. Yadali
as 21-452
Defendant:
Supervising Officer John Doe III, New York State Police Officer John Doe I, Sgt. Kevin Trombley, New York State Trooper Police Officer and others
Defendant / Appellee:
John Merla, New York State Trooper Police Officer and Shameed Yadali, New York State Trooper Police Officer
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Kim Vasquez
Thome v. Pennsylvania State Police Officers John Doe 1-20
as 1:2020cv02167
Defendant:
Pennsylvania State Police Officers John Doe 1-20
Plaintiff:
Derek S. Thome
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Miller et al v. Salvaggio et al
as 5:2020cv00642
Defendant:
Officer Jim Wells, Kirby Police Department, Leon Valley Police Department and others
Plaintiff:
Jack Miller, M. P., Lisa Pesina and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Anderson v. Trustees of the California State University et al
as 3:2019cv06997
Defendant:
San Jose State Police Officer John Doe, Trustees of the California State University and San Jose State University Police Department
Plaintiff:
Adroa Anderson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Myers v. Deschutes County et al
as 6:2011cv06331
Defendant:
Larry Blanton, Deschutes County, Deschutes County Sheriff Personnel John Doe 1 through IV and others
Plaintiff:
Danny Jay Myers
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.
