US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Cases 161 - 170 of 53,716
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
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00389
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Hill et al v. Warren Averett LLC et al
as 2:2024cv00392
Plaintiff:
Mildred Susan Hill and Bryan Hirsch
Defendant:
Warren Averett LLC, Warren Averett Companies LLC, Mary Elliott and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Removal
Brewer v. Crabtree et al
as 6:2024cv00396
Petitioner:
Stephen D Brewer
Respondent:
Chadwick Crabtree and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Llovera v. Parker
as 5:2024cv00397
Plaintiff:
Rafael Llovera
Defendant:
Stephen Parker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Chen v. Burttram & Henderson
as 2:2024cv00390
Plaintiff:
Chao Chen
Defendant:
Burttram & Henderson
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Nash v. F C I - Talladega
as 1:2024cv00391
Plaintiff:
Paul Nash, Jr
Defendant:
Warden F C I - Talladega
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
TitleMax of Alabama Inc v. Hambright et al
as 7:2021cv01602
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1334 Bankruptcy Appeal
Kilpatrick et al v. Testani
as 2:2024cv00386
Plaintiff:
Sierra Kilpatrick and Jonathan Kilpatrick
Defendant:
Felicia Testani
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Phillips v. Ivey
as 4:2024cv00395
Petitioner:
Matthew Sherman Phillips
Respondent:
Governor Katherine Ivey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
