Cases 1 - 10 of 11
KADAMOVAS v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 2:2023cv00022
Plaintiff:
JURIJUS KADAMOVAS
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, STEVEN KALLIS and THOMAS J. WATSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Senty-Haugen v. Jesson et al
as 0:2023cv00033
Plaintiff:
Arthur Dale Senty-Haugen
Defendant:
Lucinda Jesson, Nancy Johnston, Dennis Benson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Benson v. Jesson et al
as 0:2022cv03059
Plaintiff:
Brandon Keith Benson
Defendant:
Lucinda Jesson, Nancy Johnston, Dennis Benson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Frederick v. Wexford Health Sources Inc et al
as 4:2021cv04186
Plaintiff:
William Frederick
Defendant:
Wexford Health Sources Inc, David Marcowitz, . Vanzandt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Powers v. Jumper et al
as 4:2017cv04277
Plaintiff:
Thomas Powers
Defendant:
Shan Jumper, Paula Lodge and Jonathon Watson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Beckel et al v. Scott et al
as 4:2017cv04247
Plaintiff:
Andrew W Beckel and Allen M Barnard
Defendant:
Gregg Scott, Erik Kunkle, C Clayton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Carpenter v. Pennock et al
as 4:2017cv04208
Plaintiff:
Jermaine D Carpenter
Defendant:
Wanda Pennock, Paula Lodge, Lisa Logden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith et al v. Dimas et al
as 4:2017cv04173
Plaintiff:
Michael W Smith
Defendant:
James Dimas, Gregg Scott, Shan Jumper and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Michael Smith, et al v. Paula Lodge, et al
as 17-2277
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL W. SMITH and JOSHUA D. WARNER
Defendant - Appellee:
PAULA D. LODGE, AMBER JELINEK, WILLIAM BARNES and others
Smith et al v. Lodge et al
as 4:2017cv04094
Plaintiff:
Michael W Smith and Joshua D Warner
Defendant:
Paula D. Lodge, Amber Jelinek, William Barnes 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.
