US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama Civil Rights Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 2,926
Ortiz v. Angel et al
as 2:2024cv00403
Plaintiff:
Reynaldo Ortiz
Defendant:
Edgar A Angel, Andrew T Posten and Alabaster, City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Robertson v. Hydromax USA et al
as 2:2024cv00409
Plaintiff:
Fatuma Robertson
Defendant:
Hydromax USA and Tommy Chandler
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Holt v. Gray Television Inc et al
as 2:2024cv00398
Plaintiff:
Eddie Gray Holt
Defendant:
Gray Television Inc, WTOK TV, Jacque Harms and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Wills v. Howard et al
as 7:2024cv00380
Plaintiff:
Damien Wills
Defendant:
C Howard, TD Brown, T Watkins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
East v. Alabama State Board of Pharmacy et al
as 2:2024cv00369
Plaintiff:
Billy Flint East
Defendant:
Alabama State Board of Pharmacy, Donna Conyers Yeatman, James S Ward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Moon v. Jones et al
as 2:2024cv00353
Plaintiff:
Debra Moon
Defendant:
Eddie Jones, Sherry Briggs, Marcus Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
George v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, The
as 2:2024cv00351
Plaintiff:
Donald George
Defendant:
Cincinnati Insurance Company, The
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Williams v. Knox et al
as 7:2024cv00319
Plaintiff:
Aline H Williams
Defendant:
Jessie Knox, Deb Knox, Franderick Knox and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Rusk et al v. City of Birmingham, Alabama
as 2:2024cv00299
Plaintiff:
Daniel Rusk and Mary Frances Rusk
Defendant:
City of Birmingham, Alabama
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bell v. Birmingham Board of Education
as 2:2024cv00279
Plaintiff:
Miss DeKorrie K Bell
Defendant:
Birmingham Board of Education
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
