Cases 51 - 60 of 3,684
In re: Frederick Wroten
as 24-11849
Petitioner:
In re: FREDERICK WROTEN
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF ALABAMA
Brewer v. Crabtree et al
as 6:2024cv00396
Petitioner:
Stephen D Brewer
Respondent:
Chadwick Crabtree and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
State of Alabama v. Hammond (MAG+)
as 1:2024cv00195
Plaintiff:
State of Alabama
Defendant:
Hammond Ketavious Javon and Ketavious Javon Hammond
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal
Watkins v. Morgan et al
as 5:2024cv00394
Petitioner:
Jessie James Watkins
Respondent:
Phyllis Morgan and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Phillips v. Governor Kay Ivey et al
as 1:2024cv00551
Plaintiff:
Matthew Sherman Phillips
Defendant:
Governor Kay Ivey, John Hamm, Steven Marshall and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Battle v. Headley et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2024cv00212
Plaintiff:
Antonio Dentray Battle
Defendant:
Joseph H. Headley and State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Battle v. Headley et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2024cv00585
Plaintiff:
Antonio Dentray Battle
Defendant:
Joseph Headley and State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Berger v. Skully et al
as 1:2024cv00076
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Berger
Defendant:
William E. Skully, Jr, J. Dean, Michele M. Thomason and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
In re: Ramaraju Erramraju
as 24-11471
Petitioner:
In re: RAMARAJU ROM ERRAMRAJU
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF ALABAMA
Linker v. State of Alabama
as 1:2024cv00087
Plaintiff:
Linker Christopher Ryan and Christopher Ryan Linker
Defendant:
State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
