"Jane Doe #1" was an individual who worked for the 144th Judicial District 7. "John Doe #1" was a deputy district clerk assigned to the 144th Judicial District
Defendant: Michael E. McGinty, Jane Doe McGinty, Holly B. Smith, Doe Smith, Bryant L. Sugg, Doe Sugg, David F. Pugh, Doe Pugh, Howard E. Gwynn and Jane Doe Gwynn
County of Lewis et al Plaintiff: Danny A Wing, Sr Defendant: Jamey McGinty, Jane Doe McGinty, Ramona Romine, John Doe Romine, John Doe # 1, Jane Doe # 1, Jane Doe # 2, John Doe # 2, Jane Doe # 3, John Doe # 3 and County of Lewis
Three minor plaintiffs, Plaintiff CB, Plaintiff John Doe, and Plaintiff Jane Doe, have been listed as pro se litigants in this action. See Dkt. No. 1 at 1-2; Dkt. No. 11 at 16. While the adult Plaintiffs may bring this lawsuit pro se , they may not act as counsel for the minor children without being a licensed attorney.
A woman identified as Jane Doe 1 was restrained in an upstairs bedroom and chained to a pole in the basement, the charges said. At times, the women were taken out of the house to Castro's garage ...
The indictment refers to the women as Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2 and Jane Doe 3 and gives a glimpse into the circumstances of their captivity. ... McGinty had said at a news conference that capital ...
Plaintiff Amato claims that Defendant McGinty denied her access to "his court," denied her "rights to proper serving process," and denied the admission of "any evidence into the court for purpose of record."
Judge McGinty engaged in "[h]ighly abusive treatment" and "[c]aused [e]xtreme pain and suffering and trauma to all plaintiffs by violating our constitutional rights." Id. at 6.
representation of Jane Doe I in the first case, and before representation in the 2014 case. “Disqualification is appropriate when an attorney accepts employment in a case involving a former client where there is a substantial relationship between the existing controversy and the