Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Cornelius Patterson, Jr. v. Annette Chambers-Smith, et al
as 23-3401
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CORNELIUS PATTERSON, JR.
Defendant / Appellee:
ANNETTE CHAMBERS-SMITH, Director of O.D.R.C., PRINCIPAL BETH OEHLER, THOMAS KING, Institution Librarian and others
Interested Party:
STATE OF OHIO
King v. Memphis Fire Dept.
as 2:2022cv02505
Plaintiff:
John Thomas King
Defendant:
Memphis Fire Dept.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
King v. Memphis Police Dept.
as 2:2022cv02506
Plaintiff:
John Thomas King
Defendant:
Memphis Police Dept.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Feathers v. Smith, et al
as 3:2022cv00463
Plaintiff:
David E. Feathers
Defendant:
Annette Chambers Smith, Chief Inspector Chris Lambert, Warden Leon Hill and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Patterson, Jr. v. Smith et al
as 3:2021cv02210
Plaintiff:
Cornelius Patterson, Jr.
Defendant:
Ms. Annette Chambers Smith, Beth Oehler, Thomas King and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Milhouse et al v. Snyder et al
as 5:2020cv10449
Defendant:
Bradley Wurfel, Daugherty Johnson, Governor Richard D. Snyder and others
Plaintiff:
Willie Stacker, R. D., Russell Lavern and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Shoop v. Mohr et al
as 3:2015cv02437
Plaintiff:
Frank Ray Shoop
Defendant:
Gary Mohr, Ed Voorhies, David Bobby and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Shoop v. Mohr et al
as 2:2015cv02718
Plaintiff:
Frank Ray Shoop
Defendant:
Gary Mohr, Ed Voorhies, David Bobby and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Swain v. Mohr et al
as 4:2014cv02074
Plaintiff:
Sean Swain
Defendant:
Gary C Mohr, Terry A. Tibbals, Rob Jeffreys and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bennett v. Mohr et al
as 2:2014cv01450
Plaintiff:
John Bennett
Defendant:
Gary Mohr, Ed Voorhies, David Bobby 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.
