Cases 11 - 20 of 90,441
Damon et al v. United States of America
as 2:2024cv00335
Plaintiff:
Damon Damon, Damon Ricardo Brown and Christie Damon
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Sewell v. Maddox et al
as 2:2024cv00338
Plaintiff:
Amy Giles Sewell
Defendant:
Thomas N Maddox, City of Elba, Alabama and Harold L. Staley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00732
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Burnett et al v. Jenkins et al
as 5:2024cv00734
Plaintiff:
Audrey Burnett and Tarek Ellison
Defendant:
Carl Denzel Jenkins and JMC Express Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Scott v. RML Huntsville AL LLC
as 5:2024cv00736
Plaintiff:
Micah Scott
Defendant:
RML Huntsville AL LLC doing business as Landers Mclarty Dodge Chrysler Jeep
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00735
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00733
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Breach of Contract
Scott v. Sirius XM Radio Inc
as 5:2024cv00737
Plaintiff:
Micah Scott
Defendant:
Sirius XM Radio Inc
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Williams v. Lawson et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2024cv00336
Plaintiff:
Arthur Williams
Defendant:
Angela Lawson, Megan Fulghum, Valicia White and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Knight v. Calloway et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2024cv00337
Plaintiff:
Troy Antwoan Knight
Defendant:
Rolanda Calloway, Tyler W. Norman, Sgt. Cole and others
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.
