Cases 31 - 40 of 100
Carpenter v. Sexton et al
as 3:2019cv00221
Plaintiff:
Casey Carpenter
Defendant:
Kentucky Department of Corrections, Don Bryant, Tennessee Department of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Boatfield v. Parker et al
as 1:2019cv00027
Plaintiff:
John Boatfield
Defendant:
Tony Parker, Lee Dotson, Bret Cobble and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Haynes v. Aramark Correctional Services, Inc. et al
as 3:2018cv00175
Plaintiff:
Leonard Haynes
Defendant:
Aramark Correctional Services, Inc., Tennessee Department of Corrections, Tony Parker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv00517
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Lowe v. Phillips et al
as 3:2017cv00449
Plaintiff:
Asata D Lowe
Defendant:
Shawn Phillips, Brian Whitman, Lowell H Ridings and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
v. Yates et al
as 3:2017cv00438
Defendant:
Larry Yates, Edmund Lones, Joann McPeters and others
Plaintiff:
Jimmy D Wilson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Covington v. Bledsoe County Corrections et al
as 2:2017cv00110
Plaintiff:
Bryan Perry Nelson Covington
Defendant:
Bledsoe County Corrections, Ariel Vazquez, Tennessee Department of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Tennessee Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2017cv00270
Plaintiff:
Marcus T Johnson
Defendant:
Tennessee Department of Corrections, Jason Woodall, Darren Settles and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Arnold v. Moinuddin et al
as 3:2017cv00245
Plaintiff:
James Emory Arnold
Defendant:
Mohammed Moinuddin and Tennessee Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. Tennessee Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2017cv00090
Plaintiff:
Kantad A. Williams
Defendant:
Tennessee Department of Corrections, Randy Lee, Reburn 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.
