Cases 1 - 10 of 161
Hill v. Taylor et al (INMATE 1)
as 3:2024cv00224
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Lamar Hill
Defendant:
Heath Taylor and Steve Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hill v. Johnson et al (INMATE 2)
as 3:2024cv00018
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Lamar Hill
Defendant:
Steve Johnson, Dana Howell, Rick Chancey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00009
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00009
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Elmore Correctional Facility et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2023cv00718
Plaintiff:
Chris Dwayne Williams
Defendant:
Elmore Correctional Facility, Lt. Carter, Ms. Thomas and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Posey et al (INMATE 4)
as 2:2023cv00701
Plaintiff:
Seron K. Smith
Defendant:
Captain Posey, Captain Nolan, Lt. Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00614
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ryles v. Logan et al (INMATE 3)
as 3:2023cv00526
Plaintiff:
Sanford Leonard Ryles
Defendant:
Reginald Logan, Heath Taylor, William Alexander and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Taylor v. State of Alabama et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2023cv00425
Plaintiff:
Johnny Ray Taylor, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Alabama and Officer Underwood
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00307
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
