US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama Civil Rights Cases
Cases 41 - 50 of 763
Robbins v. Conecuh County, Alabama et al
as 1:2023cv00349
Plaintiff:
Nakita Robbins
Defendant:
Conecuh County, Alabama, Randy Brock, James Ward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Attia v. Ford Motor Co. et al
as 1:2023cv00341
Plaintiff:
Joel B. Attia
Defendant:
Ford Motor Co. and Merit Hospital
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Attia v. Pascagoula Police, et al
as 1:2023cv00342
Defendant:
Steve Harvard, Randy Neil, Pascagoula Police and others
Plaintiff:
Joel B. Attia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Doe v. Spring Hill College et al
as 1:2023cv00340
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Spring Hill College, Craig McVey, William Robert Tate and others
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1681 Title IX Educational Amendments 1992 - Sex Discrimination
Taylor v. City of Mobile Police Department
as 1:2023cv00328
Plaintiff:
Monica Taylor
Defendant:
City Of Mobile and City of Mobile Police Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Stokes v. Town of Flomaton
as 1:2023cv00324
Plaintiff:
Bennie Stokes
Defendant:
Town of Flomaton
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Mitchell v. State Of Alabama
as 1:2023cv00325
Plaintiff:
Virgil Mitchell
Defendant:
State Of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Blackmon v. Brown
as 1:2023cv00318
Plaintiff:
Huey David Blackmon
Defendant:
William Brown, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Account Receivable
Blackmon v. Brown
as 2:2023cv00318
Plaintiff:
Huey David Blackmon
Defendant:
William Brown, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Account Receivable
Lucas v. C.O. Hollis et al
as 1:2023cv00316
Plaintiff:
David Lucas
Defendant:
C.O. Hollis and B.C.O. Rivers
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.
