Cases 11 - 20 of 20
Bryant v. Puhl et al
as 1:2016cv03712
Plaintiff:
Hattie Mae Bryant
Defendant:
Todd Puhl, Pamela Monroe, Mark Richts and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pruitt v. GMAC et al
as 1:2016cv01616
Plaintiff:
Alfredia Pruitt
Defendant:
GMAC, McCurdy & Candler, USAA Federal Savings Bank and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Thomas et al v. Carlock of Tuscaloosa Inc
as 2:2016cv00425
Plaintiff:
Lakedia Thomas and Destiny Savage
Defendant:
Carlock of Tuscaloosa Inc
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601
Carlock of Tuscloosa Inc v. Volkswagen of America Inc
as 7:2014cv01803
Plaintiff:
Carlock of Tuscloosa Inc
Defendant:
Volkswagen of America Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
WAVERLY v. Emory Healthcare Inc et al
as 4:2013cv00142
Plaintiff:
FRANCESTA F WAVERLY
Defendant:
Emory Healthcare Inc , OTIS W BRAWLEY , AMELIA ZELNAK and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Vanderford v. Conners et al
as 2:2008cv14248
Plaintiff:
Perry Gene Vanderford
Defendant:
J. Conners, G. Holland, V. Wright and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Vanderford v. L. et al
as 2:2008cv14270
Plaintiff:
Perry Gene Vanderford
Defendant:
Carlock L., Inman D., Dixon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State Prisoner Civil Rights
Vander Ford v. McNeil
as 2:2008cv14108
Plaintiff:
Perry Gene Vanderford
Defendant:
Walter A. McNeil, D. Bevis, L. Carlock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State Prisoner Civil Rights
v. Vanderford et al
as 2:2008cv14129
Plaintiff:
Perry Gene Vanderford
Defendant:
L. Carlock, J. Connor, A. Davis and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State Prisoner Civil Rights
Vanderford v. Carlock et al
as 2:2008cv14130
Plaintiff:
Perry Gene Vanderford
Defendant:
L. Carlock, J. Connor, A. Davis and others
Respondent:
Department Of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 State 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.
