Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Graham v. Glenn (INMATE 2)
as 2:2021cv00425
Plaintiff:
Donnie Eugene Graham, Jr.
Defendant:
Michael Glenn
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Green v. Smith et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2019cv00920
Defendant:
Jamie Graham, Essie Green, Michael Bellamy and others
Plaintiff:
Rahsheike Green
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bossio v. Graham et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2019cv00293
Defendant:
Ray Smith, City of Phenix City, Eddie N. Lowe and others
Plaintiff:
Hector Manuel Bossio and Hector Manuel Bossio, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Graham v. McCloud et al (INMATE 1)
as 1:2018cv00888
Plaintiff:
Adam Julius Graham
Defendant:
Billy McCloud and Coffee County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Graham v. Crow et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2018cv00755
Defendant:
Steven T. Marshall and John Crow
Plaintiff:
Charles Graham
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Graham v. Jones et al (INMATE 3)
as 1:2013cv00882
Plaintiff:
Tequan Sabre' Graham
Defendant:
Karla Jones and Luther Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Graham v. Corizon Medical Services Inc. et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2013cv00438
Plaintiff:
Stanley M. Graham
Defendant:
Corizon Medical Services Inc., Alabama Department of Corrections and Alabama Department of Corrections Legal Division
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Graham v. Hetzel et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2012cv00977
Plaintiff:
Derrick Graham
Defendant:
Gary Hetzel and Luther Strange
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cloud v. Graham et al
as 3:2010cv00866
Plaintiff:
Romanita Cloud
Defendant:
Apsylon Graham, Herbert Gates and Jerry Washington
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Graham v. Alabama Department of Corrections (INMATE 2)(MEMBER)
as 2:2009cv01171
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Glenn Graham
Defendant:
Alabama Department of Corrections
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.
