Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2022cv03152
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Anthony Mills v. Adams County Sheriff Dept., et al
as 19-60751
Defendant / Appellee:
HENRY FRANK, IV, MATTHEW HENDERSON, JACKIE DENNIS and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANTHONY DUANE MILLS
Hopkins et al v. Nichols et al
as 1:2019cv00059
Plaintiff:
Stephen Matthew Hopkins and Julie R. Hopkins
Defendant:
William (Billy) Lamb, Barry (Bo) Jackson and Anthony (Tony) Nichols
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morgan v. Nichols et al
as 5:2019cv00036
Defendant:
Sheriff Travis Patten and Jail Administrator Tony Nichols
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Plaintiff:
Andrew Morgan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Surrena v. Adams County Sheriffs Office et al
as 3:2019cv00122
Defendant:
Kevin Bailey, Tony Nichols, Boddy Powell and others
Plaintiff:
Toby Surrena
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morgan v. Nichols et al
as 5:2019cv00008
Defendant:
Travis Patten and Tony Nichols
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Plaintiff:
Andrew Morgan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Morgan v. Patten et al
as 5:2018cv00131
Defendant:
Travis Patten and Tony Nichols
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Plaintiff:
Andrew Morgan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Allen v. Dallas County, Arkansas et al
as 5:2018cv00124
Plaintiff:
Eric L Allen
Defendant:
Dallas County, Arkansas, John McNickle, Stan McGee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hall v. Adams County Sheriff Dept. et al
as 5:2017cv00146
Plaintiff:
Elijha T. Hall
Defendant:
Adams County Sheriff Dept., Travis B. Patten and Tony Nichols
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mills v. Adams County Sheriff Dept. et al
as 5:2017cv00131
Plaintiff:
Anthony Duane Mills
Defendant:
Adams County Sheriff Dept. and Tony Nichols
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
