US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 501
Taylor v. Naph Care
as 1:2023cv00299
Plaintiff:
Preston Jerome Taylor
Defendant:
Naph Care
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
McQueen v. State of Alabama Department of Corrections
as 1:2023cv00270
Plaintiff:
Marcus McQueen
Defendant:
State of Alabama Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Huey v. Dixon
as 1:2023cv00249
Plaintiff:
William Bart Huey
Defendant:
Travontay Lee Dixon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Edwards v. Jackson
as 1:2023cv00202
Plaintiff:
Donal R. Edwards
Defendant:
Heath Jackson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Mobile County Metro Jail et al
as 1:2023cv00193
Plaintiff:
Quinterious M. Williams
Defendant:
Mobile County Metro Jail, Mobile County Sheriff Office, Sam Houston and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
May v. Jackson
as 1:2023cv00169
Plaintiff:
Donald Lamar May
Defendant:
Heath Jackson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Taite v. Westry Robinson et al
as 1:2023cv00168
Plaintiff:
Marcus O. Taite
Defendant:
Briana Westry Robinson and Insurance Provider
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
King v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00147
Plaintiff:
Steven D King
Defendant:
Wexford Health Sources, Inc., Warden McClain, Officer Mendozza and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Harris v. Traweek et al
as 1:2023cv00146
Plaintiff:
Anthony Harris
Defendant:
Jesse Traweek, Tiffany White and Jadadrain Crook
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Morgan et al
as 1:2023cv00110
Plaintiff:
Quinterious Williams
Defendant:
Coy Morgan, Officer Horace Jackson and Det. Horace Jackson
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.
