Cases 121 - 128 of 128
McConico v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles et al (INMATE3)
as 2:2008cv00415
Plaintiff:
James McConico, Jr.
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Troy King and Grantt Culliver
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Whitfield v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles et al
as 1:2008cv00203
Plaintiff:
Barney Whitfield
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Thomas E. Whitson and Brooke Whitehead
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Ledlow v. State of Alabama et al (INMATE2)
as 2:2008cv00269
Plaintiff:
Rodney Ledlow
Defendant:
State of Alabama, State of Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, State of Alabama Attorney General's Office and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Lee v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al (INMATE1)
as 2:2007cv00973
Plaintiff:
Calvin Alphonse Lee
Defendant:
Alabama Department of Corrections, Paul Whatley, Kathy Holt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Benjamin v. Lewis et al
as 2:2007cv01904
Plaintiff:
Truman Benjamin
Defendant:
Seth U Lewis, Carol Rhodes, Stephanie Woodruff and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Vise v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles et al
as 5:2007cv01532
Plaintiff:
Kevin Vise
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Sidney Williams, Cynthia Dillard and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cady v. Forniss et al (INMATE3)
as 2:2007cv00746
Plaintiff:
Don Lamor Cady
Defendant:
Leon Forniss, The Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles and Troy King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Cable v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles et al (INMATE2)
as 2:2007cv00120
Plaintiff:
Anthony J. Cable
Defendant:
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Billy Mitchem and Troy King
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.
