Cases 21 - 30 of 76
Diamond v. Floyd County Jail et al
as 4:2019cv00229
Defendant:
Bobby Sapp, Tim Burkhalter, Tom Caldwell and others
Plaintiff:
Ashley Alton Diamond
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith Diamond Dutch v. Rugby Dandruff Shampoo et al
as 1:2019cv03640
Defendant:
Rugby Dandruff Shampoo and DeKalb County Jail Medical Department
Plaintiff:
Brittani Emanuel Billionaire Car Smith Diamond Dutch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Attalla v. Diamond et al
as 2:2019cv14277
Plaintiff:
Tony Attalla and Tony Salih Attalah
Defendant:
State of Florida, Ken J. Mascara, Diamond and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DIAMOND v. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 3:2019cv02929
Defendant:
SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Plaintiff:
ALBON C DIAMOND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
DIAMOND v. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 4:2019cv00355
Defendant:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Plaintiff:
Albon C. Diamond and ALBON C DIAMOND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv02801
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Floyd v. Bateman et al
as 6:2018cv00054
Plaintiff:
Eddie Frank Floyd, III
Defendant:
Jakelia Bateman, Mrs. Brown, Mario Barber and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Copeland v. McGhee et al
as 5:2018cv00083
Plaintiff:
Shannon Copeland
Defendant:
Michael P McGhee, David T McGhee, Betty Jo McGhee and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Diamond v. Department of Corrections
as 9:2017cv80616
Defendant:
Department of Corrections
Plaintiff:
Hurel L. Diamond
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Diamond v. U.S. Employess of U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
as 1:2016cv25374
Plaintiff:
David Diamond
Defendant:
U.S. Employess of U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
