Cases 171 - 180 of 8,754
Carden v. Howell et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2023cv00571
Plaintiff:
Shane Eugene Carden
Defendant:
Michael Howell and State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Dozier v. Smoak (INMATE 1)
as 1:2023cv00588
Plaintiff:
Anthony Dozier
Defendant:
Jason Smoak
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. Morgan (INMATE 4)
as 2:2023cv00560
Plaintiff:
Mitchell Bernard Johnson
Defendant:
Phyllis Morgan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00548
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00549
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Curry v. Hamm et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2023cv00650
Plaintiff:
Dominiqic I. Curry
Defendant:
John Q. Hamm and Sheryl Price
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00551
Plaintiff:
De'Vontay Jones
Defendant:
Alabama Department of Corrections, Vencini Smith, Phyllis Morgan and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cunningham v. Hamm et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00564
Plaintiff:
Dewayne Cunningham and Dewayne Scott Cunningham
Defendant:
John Q. Hamm, David Lamar, Lt. Randolph and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Daniels v. Peterson et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2023cv00535
Plaintiff:
Derrick LaWayne Daniels
Defendant:
Officer Peterson, Officer Debose, Gwendolyn Babers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Schroeder (INMATE 3)
as 3:2023cv00610
Plaintiff:
Sterling R. Davis and Sterling Ramonno Davis
Defendant:
Michael Schroeder
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.
